1951-10-31

Mr. Speaker:: I should like to inform the house that I have received a telegram from Mr. Tamizuddin Khan, president of the constituent assembly of Pakistan. This cablegram is dated this morning, 11.25 at Karachi, and reads as follows:
Mr. Speaker,
House of Commons,
Ottawa
Intimation has been received from our foreign office of the tribute paid to the memory of our beloved prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, by you, Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition and members of the Canadian House of Commons.
Please convey our heartfelt thanks and deep appreciation to them for their sympathy in our great loss.



QUESTIONS


NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL


Mr. Gagnon:: 1.	Are there any employees in the national research council who are not British subjects?
2.	H so (a) what are their names; (b) respective positions; (c) nature of their work; (d) salary of each; (e) place of origin; (f) by whom, and on what date was each recommended?


Mr. Mcllraiih:: 1.	Yes.
2.	(a) As detailed below. Cb) As detailed below, (c) As detailed below, (d) As detailed below, (e) As detailed below, (f) As detailed below. All recommendations for appointment are made by the standing committee of the honorary advisory council for scientific and industrial research.
2.	(a) Blachut, T. J., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) Photogrammetric research, (d) $5,000, (e) Switzerland!, (f) 26 January, 1951.
(a)	Doucette, J. H., (b) Research craftsman V, (c) Model, pattern and cabinet making, (d) $1.43 hourly, (e) U.S.A., (f) 8 February, 1947.
(a) Fischer, R., (b) Short term temporary,
(c)	Cytochemical investigations on halophilic bacteria, (d) $250 monthly, (e) Hungary, (f) 20 August, 1951.
(a) Liang, S. C., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) Research in catalysis and surface chemistry, (d) $4,300, (e) China, (f) 21 September, 1951.
(a) Lukasiewicz, J., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) High speed and supersonic research, (dl) $3,850, (e) Poland-, (f) 21 May,
1948.
(a) Makow, D., (b) Junior research officer,
(c)	Fundamental research in radiophysics, (d) $3,060, (e) Poland, (f) 21 September, 1951.
(a) Mordasewicz, Z., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) In charge of divisional drafting room, (d) $4,150, (e) Poland, (f) 6 October, 1948.
(a) Morel, P. G., (b) Designer I, (c) Ship design and calculations on ship model tests,
(d)	$3,420, (e) Netherlands (f) 30 May, 1949. (a) Moser, C., (b) Assistant research officer,
(c) Optical design, (d) $4,300, (e) Switzerland, (f) 11 July, 1949.
(a) Murphy, D., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) Fundamental study of the structure of bacterial polysaccharides, (d) $4,750, (e) Eire, (f) 22 November, 1946.
(a) Romanowski, M., (b) Associate research officer, (c) Electrical standards, (d) $5,600,
(e)	Russia, (f) 27 April, 1948.
(a) Schott, G. J., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) Development of high pressure hydraulic fatigue machines, (d) $3,780, (e) Netherlands, (f) 9 November, 1950.
(a) Schriever, W. R., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) Soil and foundation studies, (d) $4,450, (e) Switzerland, (f) 6 October, 1948.
(a) Shu, P., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) Microbiological research in fermentation pilot plant, (d) $4,150, (e) China, (f) 30 May,
1949.
(a) Sunne, A., (b) Technical officer I (C), (c) Test and development work on prototype aircraft structure, (d) $2,800, (e) Estonia, (f) 2 June, 1950.
(a) Van Arkel, A. E., (b) Visiting professor, (c) Research in inorganic chemistry, (d) $5,600,
(e)	Holland, (f) 13 March, 1951.
Ca) Van Asselt, B. J., (b) Temporary summer employee, (c) Research in low speed aerodynamics, (d) $200 monthly, (e) Netherlands,
(f)	20 December, 1950.
(a) Van Der Bliek, J. A., (b) Temporary summer employee, (c) Research in low speed aerodynamics, (d) $200 monthly, (e) Netherlands, (f) 20 December, 1950.
(a) Van Der Maas, G. Y., (b) Assistant research officer, (c) Fundamental research in radiophysics, (d) $4,450, (e) Netherlands, (f) 2 June, 1950.
(a) Wu, Ta-You, (b) Senior research officer, (c) Theoretical physics, (d) $6,050 (e) China, (f) 16 August, 1949.

Questions



CHALK RIVER-EMPLOYEES OTHER THAN BRITISH SUBJECTS

Mr. Gagnon:: 1.	Are there any employees working at Chalk River who are not British subjects?
2.	If so (a) what are their names; (b) respective positions; (c) nature of their work; (d) salary of each; (e) place of origin; (f) by whom, and on what date was each recommended?


Mr. Mcllraiih:: 1.	Yes.
2.	(a) Heringa, C.F., (b) Clerk III, (c) Hotel desk clerk, (d) $2400, (e) Holland, (f) Transferred to the national research council as a member of Central Mortgage and Housing staff when the council took over the operation of Deep River village, 1 April, 1951.



BALANCE OF MONEY HELD BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO CREDIT OF NEWFOUNDLAND

Mr. Browne (St. John's West):: What is the amount of the balance of money held by the federal government to the credit of the government of Newfoundland on account of the surplus taken over on confederation?


Mr. Sinclair:: In holding these balances on deposit for the province of Newfoundland, the government of Canada is acting in the relationship of banker to customer. Accordingly, it is not considered that the information asked in this question should be made public by the government of Canada.



NEWFOUNDLAND


William Joseph Browne: What progress has been made in regard to the installation of radio transmitters and receivers for the various places in Newfoundland for which provision was made in the estimates of the current year?


Mr. Benidickson:: The Canadian National Railways, who operate the Newfoundland telecommunication system, advise that orders have been placed for communication equipment in certain isolated settlements in Newfoundland and that if deliveries are made within three to four months installations should commence on a progressive basis in about six months' time.



VEGETABLE OILS IMPORTED AND PRODUCED


Mr. Follwell:: 1.	What vegetable oils have been imported during the past five years?
2.	What quantity of the several types of vegetable oils was imported in each of the years, 1945 to 1950, inclusive?
3.	What quantity of vegetable oils was produced in Canada during each of the above years?
4.	What was the comparative price between imported vegetable oils and such oils produced in Canada in each year, 1945 to 1950, inclusive?


Mr. Mcllraiih:: 1 and 2.
Imports of Vegetable Oils into Canada, 1945-1950
Calendar years
1945	1946	1947	1948	1949	1950Item	Cwt.	Cwt.	Cwt.	Cwt.	Cwt.	Cwt.Coconut oil, edible 	20	86	29	10,319	12,244Cottonseed oil, edible	749	1,270	803	1,951	87,176	78,714Olive oil, edible 	820	3,706	5,519	14,034	7,214	17,861Peanut oil, edible 	760	173	8,786	266	8,919	2,877Soya bean oil, edible 	34,929	120,972	79,636	57,697	84,967	46,670Cashew nut shell oil 	1,101	1,588	1,190	1,744	1,020	1,577Castor oil 	97,504	54,864	60,585	55,414	58,809	66,468Chinawood oil 	3,608	11,197	59,358	84,825	76,400	72,540Coconut oil, not edible	980	2,594	25,767	52,438	51,673	210,688Cottonseed oil, crude 	244,814	82,555	49,321	120,758	593,353	842,854Flaxseed or linseed oil 	1,769	1,180	2,873	897	974	6,053Oiticica oil 	
Olive oil for soap, tobacco	3,698	6,452	1,972	966	1,724	1,962and textile finishing	1,252	32	42	780	273	2,166Palm oil 	296,426	236,930	141,775	180,191	127,248	148,040Peanut oil, not edible	162	10,531	89,866	225,599	46,037	77,631Rapeseed oil 	6,952	86	17	5	732Resin oil 	5,600	7,568	10,611	5,092	5,452	13,823Sesame seed oil 	
Soya bean oil, for manu-	4	67	10	159	226	208factoring purposes 	595	554	1,278	1,288	19,026	39,344Sunflower seed oil 	
Vegetable oil, n.o.p., not	160,500	148,663	329,480	288	212,661	163,320edible 	5,448	5,452	5,497	1,106	79,601
3.	Questions Production of Vegetable Oils in Canada, 1945-1950		
Linseed	Soya bean	Other vegetable*Calendar	oil	oil	oilsYear	Imp. gals.	Tons	Tons1945 	4,573	23,2201946 	8,038	32,5741947 	12,071	30,0681948 	
13,287,866	12,410	31,7741949 	
10,097,822	22,101	34,5681950 	
10,123,342	25,967	20,291
Includes peanut, rapeseed, coconut, sunflower and mustard seed oils, each of which was produced by only 1 or 2 companies and details cannot be divulged (Statistics Act, S. 15).
4.	Wholesale Price of Vegetable Oils, Domestic and Imported, 1945-1950
(Average of Monthly Quotations)
Domestic	Imported
Coconut oil, crude, Canadian, Coconut oil, crude, in tank oars, delivered Ceylon, in tank cars,
Calendar	Toronto	delivered TorontoYear	per 100 lbs.	per 100 lbs.1945	
$ 8.10	$10.251946	
8.10	10.251947	
10.67	14.331948	
17,81	17.25(a)1949	
17,56	-1950	
18.29	19.56(b)(a)	January-April.(b)	April-December.
Note: For vegetable oils other than coconut oil comparative prices of domestic and imported are not available.



IMMIGRATION


Mr. Lain.g:: 1.	How many immigrants entered Canada from January 1, to September 30, 1951?
2.	By numbers, what was their country of origin?
3.	By numbers, what provinces were given as declared destinations?
4.	Has the federal government entered agreement with any of the provinces for the furnishing of language classes for new immigrants?
5.	Which provinces, if any, have embarked on colonization plans to assist settlement of new immigrants?
6.	Are provincial labour departments assisting the satisfactory settlement of new immigrants?
7.	What is the estimated total of new immigrants for the entire year 1951?


Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce):: 1.	The latest available figures are to August 31, 1951. During the period January 1 to August 31, 1951, 116,657 immigrants entered Canada.
2.	See statement following.
3.	See statement following.
4.	No. The organization of language classes for new immigrants is under the jurisdiction of the provincial departments of education. In 1948 they requested, through the
Canadian education association, that the federal government provide free written and visual teaching aids for use in language classes. These teaching aids were provided and are still being provided.
5.	The province of Nova Scotia and the province of Quebec have colonization plans to assist in the settlement of immigrants.
6.	Such assistance is provided by various provincial departments.
7.	150,000 approximately.
Immigration to Canada showing country of
last permanent residence, for the period January 1, 1951 to August 31, 1951: Africa (British), 107; Africa (not British), 79; Albania, 24; Arabia, 2; Australia, 263; Austria, 1,513; Belgium, 3,395; Bermuda, 37; Bulgaria, 199; Central America, 25; China, 1,967; Czechoslovakia, 2,266; Denmark, 3,190; Eire, 422; Esthonia, 3,174; Finland, 1,729; France, 4,315; Germany, 13,047; Greece, 1,598; Holland, 15,550; Hong Kong, 55; Hungary, 2,546; Iceland, 21; India, 81; Israel, 466; Italy, 14,167; Japan, 15; Latvia, 1,441; Lithuania, 650; Malta, 1,079; Mexico, 31; New Zealand, 131; Norway, 525; Poland, 8,612; Portugal, 7; Roumania, 1,093; Russia, 1,160; St. Pierre

Questions
and Miquelon, 11; South America, 534; Spain, 80; Sweden, 1,311; Switzerland, 935; Syria, 137; Turkey, 21; Ukraine, 211; United Kingdom, 19,986; United States, 5,249; West Indies (British), 394; West Indies (not British), 91; Yugoslavia, 2,581; others, 134; total, 116,657.
Source:	Statistical Unit, Immigration
Branch.
Immigration to Canada showing province of intended destination, for the period January 1, 1951 to August 31, 1951: Newfoundland, 141; Nova Scotia, 1,235; New Brunswick, 939; Prince Edward Island, 160; Quebec, 24,036; Ontario, 65,295; Manitoba, 5,281; Saskatchewan, 2,632; Alberta, 8,354; British Columbia, 8,568; Yukon and Northwest Territories 16; total, 116,657.
Source:	Statistical Unit, Immigration
Branch.



JOINT AIR TRAINING CENTRE, RIVERS, MAN.   CONSTRUCTION OF ROAD

Mr. Dinsdale:: 1.	Is the Department of National Defence proceeding with the construction of a road into the joint air training centre at Rivers, Manitoba?
2.	If so, when did the work commence?


Mr. Blanchette:: 1.	No. The Department of Public Works of the province of Manitoba is constructing a new road to the C.J.A.T.C., Rivers.
2.	Not applicable.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


Mr. Gagnon:: 1.	What is the name of the chairman of the court of referees established under the Unemployment Insurance Act, in the district of Chicoutimi?
2.	What are his duties?
3.	What salary does he receive?
4.	What allowance does he receive for his travelling expenses?
5.	How old is he?
6.	What are his qualifications?


Mr. Cote (Verdun-La Salle):: 1.	Mr. Charles-Henri Desbiens.
2.	The duties of the chairman are to act as chairman of a court of referees, consisting of a representative of employers and a representative of insured persons, and to adjudicate upon all claims and questions in connection therewith which are appealed by the claimant or referred by an insurance officer.
3.	The chairman receives no salary but is paid a per diem allowance of twenty dollars for a full day session and one of fifteen dollars for a half day session.

4.	None, but he receives the usual allowance for travelling expenses if called upon to sit as chairman of a court in a place other than his own district.
5.	This information is not available here.
6.	University graduate; social worker; forestry engineer.



MR. ALFRED VALDMANIS

Mr. Higgins:: 1.	When was Alfred Valdmanis, one-time minister of finance in the government of Latvia and presently director general of economic development for the province of Newfoundland, admitted to Canada?
2.	Has he become a naturalized Canadian citizen?
3.	Under whose sponsorship did he enter Canada?
4.	What was his history prior to entering Canada?
5.	Was he employed by the government of Canada since entering Canada?
6.	If so, in what positions, and at what salaries?
7.	By whom was he recommended to the government of Newfoundland?


Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce):: 1.	October 13, 1948.
2.	No. On June 3, 1949, he filed a declaration of intention to become a Canadian citizen, but he will not be eligible for citizenship until he has resided in Canada for five years.
3.	Lady Davis foundation.
4.	From information provided department prior to entry, it would appear that Dr. Valdmanis' history is, briefly:
Name-Alfred Arthur Alexander Valdmanis; Nationality-Latvian; Born, 11 September, 1908, Ziemupe, Latvia; Education- Academic degrees-Master of Philosophy, university of Latvia; Master of Economics, university of Latvia; Doctor of Jurisprudence, university of Frankfurt.
Experience-1932-35-Legal adviser, ministry of finance, trade and industry of republic of Latvia; 1936-38-Principal adviser of Latvian government on economics, finance, industry and trade, with rank of undersecretary; 1938-39-Minister of Economics, Finance, Trade and Industry of Latvian government, and president of Latvian Bank of Credits Limited; 1939-40-President and director of Latvian Electric Trust Corporation; 1940- Imprisoned by Russians; 1943-45-Imprisoned by Germans; 1945-47-Employed by headquarters of British and United States occupation forces in Germany; September, 1947, joined headquarters staff of preparatory commission for international refugee organization.
5.	Yes.
6.	Was employed from December 13, 1948, to December 13, 1949, on a part-time basis by the Department of Mines and Resources at a salary of $100 per month. During part

of the same period he filled a post of visiting professor of economics at Carleton college, Ottawa.
7.	No information.



IMMIGRATION


Mr. Riley:: 1.	How many immigrants entered Canada from May 30, to September 30, 1951, through the following ports: (a) Quebec; (b) Saint John, New Brunswick; (c) Halifax?
2.	By what steamship lines did these immigrants arrive at the above-mentioned sea ports?
3.	What were the names of the ships on which these immigrants arrived?


Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce):: 1.	(a) Quebec, 16,832; (b) Saint John, 22;
(c)	Halifax, 26,567; Total 43,421.
2.	American Export Line; Canadian Pacific S.S. Co.; Caribbean Land and Shipping Co.; Cunard S.S. Co. Ltd.; Greek Line; Holland American Line; Home Lines Inc.; Incres Shipping Co., Italian Line; Norwegian American Line; Salen Line; Swedish American Line; United States Line; United States government.
3.	See statement following. The names of the ships given are those of passenger vessels only.
Passenger vessels carrying immigrants arriving at the ports of Quebec and Halifax, for the months of June, July and August, 1951.
S.S. Anna Salen, Argentina, Ascania, Atlantic, Beaverbrae, Canberra, Columbia, Conte Biancamano, Empress of Canada, Empress of France, Empress of Scotland, Europa, Franconia, General Blatchford, General Taylor, Georgic, Gripsholm, Homeland, Italia, La Guardia, Laurentia, Lismoria, Nea Hellas, Nelly, Neptunia, Samaria, Saturnia, Scythia, Stockholm, Stavangerfjord, Volendam, Vulca-nia, Washington, Zuiderkruis.
Note: There were no passenger vessels arriving at Saint John, N. B.



PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND


Mr. Kickham:: 1.	What are the locations of the offices administering the Unemployment Insurance Act in the province of Prince Edward Island?
2.	What are the names of the persons employed, their positions and respective salaries?


Mr. Cote (Verdun-La Salle):: 1 and 2. Charlottetown local office.
Name-Classification-Salary.
Murley, J. B., Manager, E. & C. O. 2, $3,576; Murphy, J. A., E. & C. O. 3, $3,108; Cheverie, G. W., E. & C. O. 2, $2,772; MacLeod, W. S., E. & C. O. 2, $2,772; Bruce, Mrs. E.,
Questions
E. & C. O. 1, $2,436; Corrigan, Mrs. L. M., E. & C. O. 1, $2,436; Davey, W. C., E. & C. O. 1, $2,364; Orford, C. A., Clerk 2B, $2,292; Peters, W. B., Clerk 2B, $2,292; Carroll, E. J., Clerk 2A, $2,088; Martin, Miss M. E., Clerk 1, $1,668; Ross, Miss M. E., Clerk 1, $1,392; Murphy, Miss M. F., Steno 2B, $2,292.
Summerside local office.
Name-Classification-Salary.
Cannon, E. G., Manager, E. & C. O. 1, $3,240; Hogan, J. C., E. & C. O. 2, $2,772; Hogg, Miss B. B., E. & C. O. 1, $2,364; MacGuigan, W. C., E. & C. O. 1, $2,436; McLeod, N. E., E. & C.
O.	1, $2,436; McNeil, D. T., Clerk 2B, $2,292; Philipson, R., Clerk 2A, $2,088; Crosby, Miss M. D., Steno 1, $1,668; Simmons, Miss N. G., Typist 2A, $1,776.



JACQUES CARTIER BRIDGE


Mr. Dupuis:: What is the balance due on the capital account,' in amortization fund and interest, in connection with the cost of the Jacques Cartier bridge?


William Moore Benidickson: As at September 30, 1951: Capital debt $19,226,000; accrued interest thereon, $133,663.
There is no debt amortization fund, debt repayment being effected from time to time as earnings permit.



PASSPORTS ISSUED FOR TRAVEL TO U.S.S.R., POLAND AND HUNGARY    PERSONS NOT RETURNED TO CANADA

Mr. Diefenbaker:: 1.	How many passports have been issued, month by month, since the first of January, 1950, to persons desiring to travel to, or through (a) U.S.S.R; (b) Poland; (c) Hungary?
2.	How many of the persons to whom such passports have been issued have not returned to Canada?


Mr. Lesage:: Mr. Speaker, may I point out that it is impossible to give a direct answer to this question which, in part, reads as follows:
How many passports have been issued, month by month, since the first of January, 1950, to persons desiring to travel to, or through (a) U.S.S.R.: (b) Poland; (c) Hungary?
I might say that it is the general practice to issue Canadian passports valid for travel to all countries. Passports are not limited for travel to particular countries except in special circumstances and at the requests of applicants.
However, by regulation which came into force on June 30, 1951, holders of Canadian passports who intend to visit, among other countries, the U.S.S.R., Poland or Hungary, are required before undertaking such visits to notify the passport officer, 38 Bank street,

Questions
Ottawa, or the nearest Canadian, diplomatic or consular officer abroad, oi their travel plans and of the length and purpose of their visits. Since this regulation came into force there is record of a notification having been received of travel to the countries named as follows: U. S. S. R., 1; Poland, 9; Hungary, 8.


Mr. Graydon:: What are they doing over there anyway?


Jean Lesage: This is a free country.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: Even in its limited form the second part of the question has not been answered.


Jean Lesage: It is impossible to give an answer to the second part of the question because no records are kept. The regulations to which I just referred do not require that such records be kept. I would point out to my hon. friend that if he went to Hungary or Poland or Russia and returned via the United States, say through New York, and then took a train or plane to Montreal, the only thing he would have to do on entry into Canada would be to prove he is a Canadian citizen; he would not even have to show his passport.



ATLANTIC SALMON FISHING

Mr. McWilliam:: 1.	Do Atlantic salmon bound for maritime provinces and Quebec waters pass close enough to Port aux Basques to be subject to exploitation?
2.	Do Atlantic salmon which pass through Port aux Basques follow four definite routes to the mainland, one leading to the Miramichi river?
3.	What approximate percentage of the Atlantic salmon passing Port aux Basques reach the area off the mouth of the Miramichi river?
4.	Do Atlantic salmon after leaving the Miramichi proceed to bay of Chaleur and rivers on the south coast of Gaspe peninsula?
5.	Has the salmon catch of the Miramichi increased (a) commercial fishing; (b) angling?
6.	Have the numbers engaged in salmon fishing increased (a) commercial; (b) angling?
7.	What is the Department of Fisheries policy regarding restrictions of Atlantic salmon (a) net fishing; (b) angling?


Mr. MacNaughi:: 1.	Yes. Migration routes are established through the medium of tagging programs. A number of separate experiments of this type have been carried out with salmon captured in the net fishery off Port aux Basques, Newfoundland. These all indicate that the fish in question do in fact reach the mainland rivers but many travel to streams on the west coast of Newfoundland. There are no data to prove that there are not other runs, for instance farther offshore or through the strait of Belle Isle, which eventually reach the mainland rivers.
2.	Not proven. The fact that the salmon were concentrated in four definite migration

routes between Port aux Basques and the mainland, could only be established by recaptures of fish en route to the mainland. Such recaptures as were made were chiefly from the shore areas and the rivers. There is no doubt that one of the principal travel routes leads from Port aux Basques to the Miramichi area. In the largest tagging program in the year 1937, tags were affixed to 599 salmon. Of these, 80 (about 13 per cent) were later recaptured. Thirty-two individuals were retaken by Newfoundland netters. Of the remaining 48, 20 eventually reached the vicinity of the Miramichi.
3.	On the basis of limited tagging experiments approximately 42 per cent. Even if we could accept as accurate and final the figures given in (2) above, only 20 out of 48 or approximately 42 per cent reached the Miramichi area. It must be remembered that 519 or 87 per cent of those originally tagged were not recaptured. Part or all these might have migrated to other areas for which no recaptures are shown. Calculation of percentage returns from any area on the basis of tagging are inaccurate since they are definitely affected by location and intensity of the fisheries as well as by the type and efficiency of the collection system.
4.	Some do and others seek the Miramichi river and its tributaries. Tagging experiments off the mouth of the Miramichi river in which tags were affixed to 411 salmon produced 72 recaptures. Of these 25 were retaken in the drift net fisheries near the area of tagging, 25 in the bay of Chaleur and 22 in the Miramichi river itself. It is evident that all certainly do not eventually reach the rivers on the south coast of the Gaspe peninsula. In fact almost half may be headed for the Miramichi river itself.
5.	(a) No. Considering the period between 1942 and 1950, the total annual commercial catch by drift nets and trap nets ranged between 3,129 and 5,189 cwt. This was similar to catches in other years back to 1920. There are no indications of significant long term trends either upwards or downwards. The catch by drift nets alone between 1942 and 1950 fluctuated between 2,320 and 4,050 cwt. per year, with the highest catch occurring at the middle of the period.
(b) Yes. From 1942 to 1950 the annual catch of bright salmon by anglers ranged from 8,972 to 34,456 fish. In 1948, 1949 and 1950 the catches were 20,825, 34,456 and 33,378 respectively; the highest recorded for the Miramichi.
6.	(a) No. Since 1930 there has been no significant change in the number of drift nets or trap nets operated.

(b) Yes. The number of tourist anglers who often fish for only a few hours in any one area has increased greatly. Much more effort in rod-days of angling is now being expended than in earlier years and this is reflected in the better catches.
7.	(a) The Department of Fisheries has for some years set a quota of 175 drift net licences for the Miramichi area. Actually fewer than this number are used annually.
Trap net licences are issued under a series of rules which have the effect of maintaining the present number or even decreasing it.
(b) There are no restrictions on the number of anglers.



COMPULSORY SAVINGS ACCOUNTS

Mr. Lennard:: 1.	How many compulsory savings accounts have not been paid by the government?
2.	What is the total value of these amounts?
3.	To whom should one apply in connection with an unpaid account?


Mr. McCann:: 1.	As of the 29th October, 1951, there were 66,313 undeliverable cheques for refundable savings portion of tax in respect of the 1942, 1943 and 1944 taxation years.
2.	$3,176,334.51.
3.	The district taxation office where the individual filed his income tax return for 1942, 1943 or 1944.



ERIEAU BEACH, ONT.    CONTRIBUTIONS TO DRAINAGE SCHEME

Mr. Lennard:: 1.	Is the government contributing towards the Erieau beach, Burke drainage scheme, Kent county, Ontario?
2.	If so, what is the amount of this contribution?
3.	What percentage is this of the estimate's total cost?
4.	What other governing bodies are contributing to the balance of the cost?


Mr. Gardiner:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Approximately $90,000.
3.	50 per cent.
4.	Province of Ontario.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


STEEL IMPORTS AND PRODUCTION


Mrs. Fairclough:: 1.	What quantities of steel were (a) imported from the United States; (b) produced in Canada, in each of the months of January to September, 1950 and 1951?
2.	Of steel imported and produced in Canada over the above periods, what quantities have been allocated under dominion government authority, and
Orders for Returns
of steel so allocated, what quantities have been allocated to:	1.	(a) buildings; (b) highways,
bridges, culverts, etc.; (c) defence; (d) production other than defence production. 2. (a) public buildings; (b) private buildings other than dwellings; (c) multiple dwellings such as apartment blocks; (d) single dwellings?



ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE


Mr. Balcer:: 1.	What is the total number of officers above the rank of squadron leader in the Royal Canadian Air Force?
2.	Of these, how many are French Canadian?



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE


Mr. Balcer:: How much money has been spent in the province of Quebec by the national defence department between January 1 and June 30, 1951, for recruiting in (a) newspaper advertising; (b) radio advertising?



ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY-OFFICERS ABOVE RANK OF LIEUTENANT COMMANDER  FRENCH- CANADIAN OFFICERS

Mr. Balcer:: 1.	What is the total number of officers above the rank of lieutenant-commander, in the Royal Canadian Navy?
2.	Of these, how many are French Canadian?



ARMY HEADQUARTERS


Mr. Balcer:: 1.	What is the total number of officers above the rank of major at army headquarters in Ottawa?
2.	Of these, how many are French Canadian?



ROYAL ROADS SERVICE COLLEGE


Mr. Balcer:: 1.	What is the total number of cadets at the Royal Roads service college at the present time?
2.	How many in each grade year?
3.	In each grade how many are French Canadian?



ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE


Mr. Balcer:: 1.	What is the total number of cadets at the Royal Military College at the present time?
2.	How many in each grade year?
3.	In each grade how many are French Canadian?



CANADIAN FORCES


Léon Balcer: What is the total number of recruits that have enlisted in the three services in the province of Quebec, each month, during the period between September 1, 1950, and August 31, 1951?

The Address-Mr. Studer



CHARLOTTETOWN, P.E.I., SHIP REPAIR DOCK   WORK PERFORMED BY BRUCE STEWART AND COMPANY

Mr. Kickham:: 1.	Was any work done by the firm of Bruce Stewart and Company on vessels at the ship repair dock at Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, during the year 1951?
2.	If so, on what vessels?
3.	Was this work let by tender or cost plus basis?
4.	If by cost plus, what percentage was allowed?
5.	What wages were paid to all classes of workmen on the above, and how do these rates compare with similar work being done at the repair dock at Lauzon, Quebec?



THE ROYAL TOUR


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: should like to address a question to the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent). Does the exclusion of newspapermen from all functions organized by the Canadian embassy at Washington in connection with the royal visit to that city represent government policy, or was this decision made by the Canadian ambassador to the United States?


Hon. Brooke Claxion (for the Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, as Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs perhaps 1 might answer that question. No such decision was made. There are only two events scheduled for the Canadian embassy. The first is a reception for commonwealth ambassadors and certain senior members of their staffs before lunch tomorrow, and the second is a dinner at which Their Royal Highnesses will be the hosts tomorrow evening.
Time, space, and numbers have imposed certain limitations upon the press coverage. In the case of the reception, in 45 minutes 150 people will have to be presented. It has been arranged that one representative of the press of the United States, Great Britain, and Canada will be chosen from those travelling with the royal party. That should provide adequate coverage on that occasion.
The dinner is given by Their Royal Highnesses and it seems logical that a dinner to be given by them should follow the precedent established by the president in giving a dinner for them at Blair House where there was no press coverage whatever. It was purely a private affair.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Monday, October 29, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert
(Mr. Balcer.]	|
Cauchon for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Drew, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Coldwell.
Mr. Irvin Studer (Maple Creek):: Mr. Speaker, the people of Maple Creek join with me in expressing my deep appreciation at being permitted to join with others in debating the address in reply to the speech from the throne. We in this section of the house are fortunate in being in close proximity to the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and the seconder (Mr. Simmons) of the address. We are revelling in the reflected glory that is coming to them because of the excellent presentations they have made on behalf of their constituencies.
I was raised and educated to some extent in another country and I should like to express my deep appreciation of the privilege of meeting Their Royal Highnesses The Princess Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh. We do not always realize just what is involved in this representation by the royal family. Those of us who come from other countries like the United States, who have been educated in the history of that country and its early development and association with Great Britain, are apt to come to Canada feeling that those symbols do not mean very much. We are likely to look at them with critical or perhaps sceptical eyes, but always tolerantly.
But after coming here and being subjected to the good influences that are extended to all countries connected with the commonwealth, we cannot help but join with those who have expressed the feelings of Canada. It was a proud moment for me two weeks ago when I stood in the snow on the platform at Swift Current and had the honour of being presented to Their Royal Highnesses. If some sentiment has been shown in connection with the royal visit, I hope that that sentiment will always remain because sentiment is disappearing in many parts of the world today. Another feeling, not at all connected with the welfare of the people, has taken its place. I am glad always to note the reference to the royal family and princess made in the prayers at the opening of this House of Commons when we ask the blessings of the Almighty upon them.
I think the people of Canada owe a debt to the leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew) for the presentation he made at the beginning of the week when he brought to the attention of parliament and1 the people of Canada details of the methods being employed in this country to destroy the very institutions upon which our country is built. I am glad that we have in Canada people who are ready to stand

The Address-Mr. Studer
above party and are willing to take this sort of action. I like to see people who take this attitude: may my country be always right, but right or wrong, it is my country. I think the leader of the opposition stands high in the esteem of the people of this country for what he did this week.
It is the duty of members of parliament to bring before the House of Commons the conditions that exist in various parts' of the country, and I hope to deal with my constituency in a few words. The constituency of Maple Creek runs 180 miles along the borders of the state of Montana. This constituency is therefore interested in the conditions that prevail across the line. Maple Creek is: one of the largest settled constituencies in the country, as I have mentioned before. It is almost one and a half times the size of Prince Edward Island. It is two-thirds as large as Nova Scotia. It is almost as large as Vancouver island. It is over half as large as New Brunswick. Therefore it is a large constituency, and it is so important to Canada that Canada just could not get along without it. I say that because in the constituency of Maple Creek we supply and cater to the needs of all of the people of Canada. We add to the production of wealth in Canada. We raise wheat in untold millions of bushels when it rains, and sometimes it does rain. This year it did. We contribute to the economy of Canada and to the feeding of the people of Canada by raising untold numbers of the best cattle raised anywhere, hundreds of thousands of them. We contribute eggs and poultry, and we contribute turkeys because it is turkey country.
We contribute many of the good things that people eat and we also keep them warm because we raise one-quarter of all the sheep in Canada. Therefore we try to keep you well fed and we try to keep you warm. I make no apologies for representing that constituency. It is a country of extremes. Not many other people on the earth have the extremes that we enjoy or suffer from, as the case may be, in that southwestern part of Saskatchewan close to the northern part of Montana. There is a variation in temperature in that part of Canada of over 155 degrees. I admit that perhaps it gets somewhat colder at the North pole, although I am not too sure about it. The temperature goes down to 55 below in our area so it is extremely cold, and it can be extremely warm in the summer. The temperature goes up to 105 degrees in the shade. I do not know of any country where people are more conditioned to extremes than they are in my constituency, although for sure the people are not extreme.
This year we have a crop, strange to say. We are not talking about crop failure payments in the same way as we have formerly, but we still have a most unfavourable situation because of climatic conditions. The extremes are again in evidence. When I left home about two weeks ago the ground was covered with nine inches of snow. Harvesting was at a standstill. The people who had harvested some grain and were in a position to deliver it to an elevator could get along for the time being, but there are hundreds of people in that area who have not harvested a bushel of grain. There is no prospect of crop failure payments for them because crop failure payments are based on the yield and there is no yield because the crop has not been harvested. These people have worked for the entire year. Their position is worse than of people who are employed because when you are employed you usually get paid weekly or monthly. However, when you work all year on a farm and have a crop failure you have worked for twelve months for absolutely nothing and you still have your overhead.
The situation existing on many farms is that there is no revenue whatsoever to compensate these people for their year's work, as was the case in other years when the same thing happened. There are people in that area who have not harvested a bushel. Some of them are people who have suffered crop failures in the past and as a result have not been in a position to buy machinery to do their harvesting. They have had to call for their neighbours' assistance. These same people are the ones who have not harvested anything. I hope that the situation in the province of Saskatchewan is being watched very closely by the government. The care of these people falls upon the municipalities. If they cannot handle the situation they will appeal to the provincial government, and if it cannot handle the situation it will make an appeal to the federal government. Therefore I hope that the government will watch the situation in the west closely in order to eliminate much of the suffering that is inevitable if the situation does not correct itself before winter actually sets in.
We have other troubles, as the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) pointed out yesterday, with respect to the movement of grain where there is grain. I would urge the government, as he did, that nothing be left undone to make facilities available to people with grain, although I believe that the box car situation is partially a result of what happened last year when we had a railway strike. At that time the two railway systems came to a halt. You cannot recuperate from a discontinuance of railway service from coast

The Address-Mr. Studer
to coast throughout the Dominion of Canada without having the inevitable result of conditions that never can be compensated for so far as catching up with the backlog is concerned. I think the hon. member for Lake Centre rendered a service by the presentation that he made, but he would have also rendered a service last year if he had supported the government with respect to the settlement of the railway strike. However, at that time he did not see fit to do so. We have that situation in Saskatchewan, and my latest information is that 200 points out of 2,100 are completely plugged and there is no movement of grain. I am satisfied if the situation can be corrected nothing will be left undone by the various departments to bring that about.
We were talking about what Maple Creek produced. We are anxious to produce more to fit into the general policy not only of this government but of other governments in an effort to bring down the cost of living. They tell us that there should be more production. We are doing our share in the constituency of Maple Creek by trying to increase the number of cattle, hogs and poultry, and the amount of milk and eggs. All these things go into the cost of living. There is also the cost of clothing and by raising sheep and doing these other things we want to make it possible for everyone to have sufficient of these things to enable them to continue living in the Dominion of Canada.
We are breeding new varieties of cattle. One is the cattalo which is partly buffalo and partly one of the beef breeds. The purpose is to create an animal which will have more beef on it. New crossings of breeds are coming into existence. There is the crossing of the Brahman strain of India and various breeds such as Herefords, Shorthorns, Angus and others that have been developed to produce more meat in a shorter period of time. The same thing is true of hogs and poultry, and I have already referred to our production of milk and eggs.
Last but not least, I believe that the sheep raisers should receive some consideration for their contribution to the warmth that is so necessary in our northern climate. We are only producing a quarter of the wool necessary to clothe the people of Canada. We import about 80 per cent of the wool used, and we want to eliminate synthetics if we can. I do not care very much for anything that is synthetic. I do not like synthetic clothing. I do not like synthetic food such as margarine. I do not like any of the other synthetic things that will come into use if we do not provide the original product, if we do

not provide the actual clothing and other material that nature intended us to wear.
If anyone thinks that the sheep raising industry is one of no consequence, let me remind him that there are over two million sheep in Canada. No industry has come to the government asking for assistance less than the sheep industry. No subsidy has ever been mentioned so far as they are concerned. No subsidy was ever given to them. They suffered a shrinkage in the value of their wool down to as low as five cents a pound in years gone by and still made no complaint. They were prepared to carry on. I think the reason they do so is that the blessing of God is upon them. The sheep raising industry must have found favour in the eyes of God; because, at the birth of the Lord, to what workers was the announcement first made? It was to the shepherds on the hillsides. No other industry that I know of in biblical times or since has had such recognition as to be chosen to have such an announcement made.
In the Old Testament you hear of the Lamb of God and the sacrifices that were made, and there are also references in the New Testament. Therefore they must be favoured in the eyes of God. It must be so or the sheep raisers would have been here asking for subsidies long ago. There are a quarter of a million sheep in the constituency of Maple Creek. One of the healthiest foods on earth, certainly the healthiest meat, is mutton. It is not generally known but in the olden days it was used almost exclusively. Why? Ulcers are well known in these days, especially among politicians, for various reasons, and others. Mutton is a meat that contains a substance that when you eat it puts a lining on the stomach and prevents ulcers.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Irvin William Studer: Hon. members who have never had anything to do with sheep may laugh at that, but there are authoritative sources that will agree with that statement. It puts a coating around the inside lining of the stomach and prevents disease and many of the ills that afflict people in these days.
You never heard of ulcers in the old days when people were accustomed to eating that which nature provided. Therefore I think we can be assured that we are doing >a service to our country when we eat the products that the country produces, and doing a much greater service to ourselves in eliminating illness and preventing it by eating the right type of food, as we should always do.
We have rail grading of hogs, which has made a great contribution to all of the people

of Canada. Rail grading of hogs and the premium paid on them have made a great contribution to this country. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) should give some consideration to the rail grading of lamb and mutton, because I am sure the premiums that should be paid will encourage the production of the type of lamb and mutton that the people of Canada will eat. I would ask the Minister of Agriculture to give some consideration to this matter. Our country could carry ten million sheep. I hope the day is not too far distant when the sheep industry will be recognized for what it is worth and the contribution it makes to us in this country in keeping us all warm.
The people of Maple Creek need, as everyone else does, the cost of production. We have often felt that we have not received the cost of production. We know that under the production methods we have out there, with a limited rainfall, we cannot compete with those areas that raise 30, 40 or more bushels of wheat to the acre year after year. We need 12 bushels to the acre on an average to meet our cost of production. When you receive 5 bushels, 6 bushels and 12 bushels to the acre it is impossible to compete with those who have a higher production. We would need $10 a bushel to compete with them. But that condition will not always exist, because we are doing things out in that country to place ourselves in a position where we will dissociate ourselves from the liability that many people in Canada think we are. We need your help. You have been giving it to us but we are going to ask for more, and eventually we will ask for none.
We need that cost of production. We have railway lines out there, and we hear much about them. We are complaining about the non-competition of those railway lines. We want more of them. Comparatively speaking we are farther from the markets than anyone else in western Canada. We are on the dividing line between the three railway outlets out there. We are the same distance from Churchill, Vancouver and the head of the lakes. We are at the extreme end of those three places, and as a consequence our overhead is higher both for what we ship out and what comes in to us. Then there are the freight rates and the railways situation, which has been somewhat overemphasized although the cost to us is prohibitive. Sometimes we are asked by our friends across the way to rise in our places and make statements on these various matters that affect western Canada. It is an easy thing to ask someone to make a statement, but the responsibility of keeping the wheels of this
The Address-Mr. Studer country running so that transportation will not come to a standstill and the people will not suffer as the result of any action that we take, rests on the government. We carry that responsibility. I might remind some hon. members that if the Liberal members had not spoken on many of these things that are before the House of Commons and the country today they would not be talking about them either, because they would not be before us. We want our railway branch lines. Certainly we want equalization of freight rates. That is what we must have. We want lower machinery costs, and we need them. I would remind some of my friends who have made a considerable number of suggestions in the House of Commons about the high cost of machinery that there is nothing in the world to prevent Saskatchewan or any other province from going into the machinery business. I do not know why they have not gone into that business long ago-they went into everything else over which they lost money, so they might as well lose money on this. Since there is a co-operative implement company or association in our country I suggest that the Saskatchewan government put $10 million into the Saskatchewan Cooperative Implement Association and give them the boost of their lives. I hope that as a result of that contribution cheaper machinery will be made available so that we can produce at lower costs.
Of course we need lower taxation. Who does not? But try to get it. We have not got it out in Saskatchewan. I can assure this house that we need lower taxation. A different situation exists out in that country than exists anywhere else, on account of the instability of production, the instability of the country. That will last until stability takes place as a result of the efforts that we are putting forth out there to obtain it. We want lower prices of course. We are living along the Montana border for a distance of 180 miles. We are in close association with the people to the south of us. It is pretty hard to tell our people out there that things are cheaper in Canada than they are in Montana, across the line. I just cannot get that one across no matter how hard I try, because I know it is not true. Incidentally I have a little knowledge of it because I have seven brothers in the United States and they talk faster than I do. They are all Republicans, and I am a Democrat, if there is such a thing in Canada. As a result I am lucky to be still here. However, that price situation is serious and a continued aggravation, I believe, to any constituency anywhere near the United States boundary. I often wonder what the politicians along the Mexican-United States boundary

The Address-Mr. Studer talk about. However, talking that way provides no solution. I know the way our people feel about this. They know that fourteen million people cannot compete with one hundred and fifty million people. Our people know that production costs are lower with volume. Everyone knows that. That is axiomatic. But what they want to know is this. They want to know that no one is making exorbitant profits in Canada on what they have to sell. That is what they want to know, but I do not know how to go about telling them. Something should be done about it. If nothing can be done other than to assure our people that no one is making profits over and above what they are entitled to, and making it exorbitantly at the expense of those people who do not work eight hours a day or forty hours a week but work sixteen hours a day and over one hundred hours a week to supply the necessities to the people of Canada, it will help.
Maple Creek needs continued rehabilitation. We are living in a dry country, and we do not let any water disappear if we can help it. It is our hope that hon. members will see to it that we get the help we need because they will be recompensed 100 per cent. We need increased assistance under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. It is a strange thing, but many stand in their place in this house and say: The cost of living has risen 100 per cent. The dollar is worth only fifty cents. We should increase wages accordingly. But the people out in that dry area are living on the present fifty cents that was established as a dollar in 1939, under P.F.A.A. and they have just as much right to have an increase in prairie farm assistance payments as anyone else in Canada has. What they receive today does not begin to carry the burdens that are in existence. I can tell you that we are not going to have to talk about it forever.
We are of the first generation farming in western Canada and we are trying to establish a country. Is there any district anywhere in Canada that has produced the results in the first generation that we are producing out west? I ask you that question. I do not think there is. It takes from two to three generations, and sometimes longer, to make a farming area which is of real help to the Dominion of Canada and to the people, so we are still in that primary stage in which we were when we came into this country. Do not worry about farmers ever becoming too rich. There was never a danger to a country so long as the farmers were prosperous, but the danger immediately becomes evident when the farming population becomes poor. They should never become poor. They provide the essentials the people have to have to live. We can
[Mr. Studer.l

get along without you, but you cannot get along without us. We would, therefore, ask for scientific research to continue these things.
We have to have special consideration in all things, in connection with the collection of debts and in connection with the V.L.A. men who are established there. They cannot meet the ordinary requirements where there is instability in agriculture. I am glad to say that I believe our various government organizations realize this. If they do not, they should. These men have decided that is where they want to live. Sometimes they decide to live in the wrong place, unfortunately, but after they have decided to live there then we should establish them, no matter what the cost may be, in order to enable them to eventually help make their contribution to the welfare of Canada.
Out west we have an organization known as Ducks Unlimited, and ducks unlimited it is. It came into existence about ten years ago, financed by our gpod friends the sportsmen in the United States. Its purpose is to augment the duck population. This has been a good thing because the Eskimos and Indians, who are dependents of Canada, have had their food supply increased. Ducks Unlimited has, therefore, eliminated a cost that would otherwise fall upon Canada. The organization has built over 309 projects in western Canada and set up breeding grounds for the ducks. However, even a good thing can be overdone. When nature is out of balance, inevitably there are going to be dire results. We have farmers in that area who have lost their entire crop because hundreds of thousands of ducks devoured it.


An hon. Member:: Too much quack.


Irvin William Studer: Too much quack is right. At the same time, I would not want the organization to discontinue its efforts. I would say that the sportsmen, ammunition organizations, railways and tourist agencies, all those who benefit as the result of this increased duck population, should contribute to a fund which would offer insurance to the average farmer against his crop being devoured by ducks. For a nominal fee a farmer could then take out duck insurance, and when his crops were destroyed he would be recompensed. Either that, or they had better hurry along with their supersonic noises to scare these ducks out of the country, because the farmers out there cannot tolerate the condition any longer.
We want this South Saskatchewan river dam. This country is losing millions of dollars every year that dam is not built. What are we afraid of? We are a young country that has a place in the esteem of all the

countries of the world. We seem to be hesitant about going ahead with something that just has to be done. In certain areas in Saskatchewan you do not let water run away. You hold it, and put it on the land in order to produce things. Anything else seems like waste, so this is one of the musts out in Saskatchewan. I hope this committee soon makes up its mind favourably about that project.
Much has been said about the situation in Saskatchewan and what governments can do. I have tried to point out a few things that the dominion government could do. I should like to say a few words now about what the Saskatchewan provincial government could do. Here, we have a situation where all the granaries are filled to the bursting point with feed grain. We have no sheep policy, no hog policy, no cattle policy, no nothing. The grain is there, and that is all there is. What is the most natural thing to do? It is to put the feed grain in its proper place, in an animal, and everyone will make more money. What are we going to do without a policy? I suggest that the dominion government formulate a policy for those people out in Saskatchewan. They, the Saskatchewan government, spend all their time on the Korean policy or on the United States policy, but no policy for the people at home. Will the dominion government please come to the rescue and tell the provincial minister of agriculture and the people of Saskatchewan how to raise pigs? Apparently the minister never learned the facts of life. He has not learned anything about the birds and bees.
In any event, that is the logical outcome of socialism. Socialism never produces anything. All it can do is to distribute poverty, ration it amongst the people. Every country that has been under socialism suffers, and eventually passes out of existence. I suggest to the leader of the socialists in this House of Commons that he take another trip around the world. A few years ago he was telling us about New Zealand being a fine country; the New Zealand government went out. He started to tell us about Australia, and what happened there? He started to tell us about Britain, and what happened there? He has just started to tell us about Egypt, and I am feeling sorry for the Egyptians. I hope he never starts talking about us in Canada, because we will go out too.
We have an organization in Saskatchewan calledi the Ag-Reps, one of the finest organizations that ever came into existence. It was started originally by the Liberals and) added1 to by the socialists-I have to give them some credit. These Ag-Reps are working under
The Address-Mr. Studer most difficult conditions, night and day, trying to formulate some agricultural policy which the government in Saskatchewan has never given. I think a tribute should be paid to these wonderful men who have spent so much time trying to do the impossible out in Saskatchewan.
There were some other things I wished to say, Mr. Speaker, but -perhaps I shall have another opportunity. We have heard so much about price controls and inflation. I know all about that, because when I have some money to spend I am inflated and when I have none I am deflated. Out in Saskatchewan the situation is not that there is too much money running after too few goods. It is a situation in which everyone is running after some money trying to get some purchasing power. The proof of that is the fact that over 90 per cent of our farms have no water system and about 90 per cent of them have no electric lights. I have been on my farm for 35 years, but it has no water system and no electric lights. Nature pays back everything that a man earns, but nature is the tightest reckoner I ever saw. We still believe that nature is a little late in some of her payments to us.
I do not know how we are going to correct our economic situation in a country such as ours. We have 14 million people, but our imports amount to over $3 billion a year. I think there has to be an international effort, just as there is in regard to NATO, that international organization for the preservation of peace. That organization determines what can be done in order to preserve peace, and there should be one set up to preserve our national economy if we are going to continue to import over $3 billion worth of goods. We are agreed also that, among other things, Canada needs the St. Lawrence deep waterways. It would help us out in western Canada. We need most, if not all, the things the government has done-except the things they have not done. However, we can agree that that is the situation or we would be agreeing possibly with some of the things that other opposition friends have been saying.
We are glad that some provision is being made for our soldiers to augment their pensions and for our aged people. There is no one more deserving. As time goes on and as the national economy increases-and we in the constituency of Maple Creek are doing our share to increase the national economy- we shall always be agreeable to making provision for the needs of those people.
A minute ago we were talking about defence. I also am not too sure that the steps we are taking are sufficient for our needs today in Canada. I think it is the
576	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Studer primary duty of any government, regardless of anything else, to defend this country. Without defence, everything else is of no value. The matter of defence is so imperative that, no matter what system of social services you have or what economy is practised, if that defence is not sufficient in the interests of the people of Canada, everything else will disappear. All I know is that when you live near bear country, in order to protect yourself it is prudent to carry a gun. I therefore say that Canada should consider seriously whether it is making sufficient progress in connection with defence.
One word more, Mr. Speaker, and I hope that I am getting close to the end of my remarks. We have farm organizations out in Saskatchewan, as you know. In the world today everyone has an organization, and now there is not only competition between the people of the world but there is competition between organizations. In other words, we have got to the jloint of having to decide which organization is the strongest to forward its aims and objectives and which will obtain the greatest benefits. We had farm organizations that have been lamentably in a position-as farm organizations possibly always will be-of being inadequate to meet the needs of the industry which they serve. Why should there have to be any farm organization, when all the people in the world are dependent upon what the farmer produces? Everyone should be protecting the farmer. His job is to produce, not to study economics, not to study politics, not to spend his life in trying to determine what should be done. His life is spent in producing the things that you need. That is his occupation, his vocation. Therefore all organizations throughout Canada should come to the assistance of the farmers in order to protect their industry and to see that they get a cost of production sufficient to live so that their time does not have to be spent in unproductive efforts to make it possible to remain in existence in Canada. I ask the people of Canada and all their organizations to make sure that their primary industry is protected in this country.
But we have farm organizations. The finest men and women in Canada belong to them. May more success attend their efforts. I hope they become great; if you do not take the attitude and protect them, I hope they become great enough to protect themselves. Unfortunately the history of western Canada is replete with instances of what has happened to farm organizations. They are subject to political interference. The people that belong to these organizations have not time to study in order to determine what course they should follow, so they are subject to what people tell


them. If there are people in this world who do not have sufficient honour to tell these people the truth, then these people adopt policies and ways and means that lead to their destruction, as witness what happened in Saskatchewan in the past. There was the wonderful organization of the united farmers that was built up. The C.C.F. are the result of what happened to that organization called' the United Farmers. So I am asking all of the people of this country to join all the farm organizations so that they can be strong. I do not like the word "demand". I never did like it. But they will have to demand that they have consideration. That course is forced upon them by other organizations demanding possibly more than is their rightful share of the national economy. Why should the farmers always take what is left? The farmer refuses to do that. That is the result; when all other people are organized and the farmers are not, the farmer takes what is left. Farm organizations are therefore necessary, Mr. Speaker, but they also should be prevented from having political influence that will destroy them.
We have a wonderful farm organization in Saskatchewan at the present time. We had in July a meeting of the western farm organizations of the three provinces, in Regina. The meeting was held in a church. One would never imagine that anything would happen in a meeting of that kind and in such a place that should not happen in a place of that kind. The government members met this farm organization in the forenoon. We were up in the place where the choir sat and the presentation of the farmers union members was made to us. Mr. Gardiner, who replied for us, replied to the presentation and it was received with good grace, I think, by most of the farmers of western Canada. They were, of course, critical of some of the government's regulations or some of the government's actions. The wheat payment at that time was very much in prominence. So the president of the Manitoba farmers' union reports in the Union Farmer on page 7 on the meeting in Regina, and he mentions among other things that the following morning we met with the government members including a number of cabinet ministers, and after Mr. Phelps, who is the president of the farmers, ably presented our brief, we listened with mixed emotions to the nonchalant reply of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner). In the afternoon we met with a group of M.P.'s representing all opposition parties. They spoke feelingly and stated that they were with us and that the farm organizations were not born a moment too soon.
That is what I want to talk about; I refer to the presentations. Everyone will remember

the procedure in this House of Commons in that week when we were considering this wheat situation, when the vote was taken in regard to the wheat situation; everyone will remember when there was a resolution or a subamendment presented to this house asking for the government to consider a payment of twenty-five cents on the wheat under the British contract. All hon. members will remember that subamendment asking that the government give consideration to the payment of twenty-five cents on the wheat. The government had already given consideration to the payment at least a dozen times. The die was cast as to what the people of Canada would agree to allow the western farmer for his wheat. It was not enough. The farmer throughout the years has earned more consideration from the rest of the people of Canada. Yet that was the way the die was cast.
So in the afternoon at that farm meeting in Regina our opposition members were presented also with a brief by the farmers' union. They were allowed a short period of time, up to the limit of twenty minutes, in which to speak. What would you expect? They all made a crackerjack of a political speech and they all told the farmers' union something like this: they said they were behind them, that they were the farm bloc, that if it were not for them, the farmers would not have anything. They told them that they supported the twenty-five cent wheat payment. They told them that they voted for the twenty-five cent wheat payment. But they never voted for the twenty-five cent wheat payment. They voted for consideration of the twenty-five cent wheat payment by the government. So after all these political speeches, Mr. Speaker, I stood in the back of the hall. I did not like it, I can assure you, so I sent a little question up to the chairman. I had it presented to the hon. member for Melfort (Mr. Wright) and the question said: Why did not the western C.C.F. members vote for the $65 million that the farmers received on this wheat payment? The reply by the hon. member was: I did vote for the $65 million wheat payment to the western farmers. Every member in this House of Commons knows that that hon. member was not in this chamber when that $65 million vote was taken. Neither was the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue). Neither was the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher).


Mr. Argue:: Mr. Speaker-


Irvin William Studer: Neither was the member who belongs to that great race in Scotland, the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. Bryce). He was not in the honourable chamber.
The Address-Mr. Studer


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, if I remember that evening correctly, it was a vote in committee, and I was here to vote for the $65 million.


Mr. Smith (Moose Mountain):: On a point
of order, Mr. Speaker, I was in the chamber and the hon. member was not there. The remarks made by the hon. member for Maple Creek (Mr. Studer) were absolutely correct.


Irvin William Studer: Mr. Speaker, those hon. members knew that it was a vote in committee and that it would not be recorded and that it would not be recorded on Hansard. So after this vote, this 25-cent wheat vote, those members were in a position where they were on their way, or preparing to go on their way to tell the western farmers that all the Liberals voted against the 25-cent wheat payment-and they were not in the House of Commons when that $65 million was voted in committee.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I told the hon. member for Maple Creek that he could continue, but he has exceeded his time.


Some hon. Members:: Go on.


Irvin William Studer: So I am saying that if that is the situation-and that is the situation; I stood here; I counted them when the vote was taken. There were seven C.C.F. members in the House of Commons, and those four were not here. What do you call people who make statements such as the hon. member for Melfort (Mr. Wright) made?
That is why I say western farmers are subject to disillusionment and subject to all the unprincipled politicians-and it is becoming more evident throughout Canada and other countries today. We know about the political procedure unprincipled politicians have followed to gain their ends. They go about in the world seeking the ruin of souls.
We are in a bacteriological war now. We had a cold war and a hot war. Now we are in a bacteriological war, because these socialistic bacteria are being spread all over the country in an effort to have people associate themselves with an untruth, the same untruth that destroyed Germany, the same untruth that lies behind the iron curtain, the same untruth that will destroy any civilization. Do not worry about the communists particularly when we know the political untruths that are rampant in this country today, that have destroyed every civilization that has not eliminated this untruth from its political life.
I wish to thank all hon. members for their kind attention. Along with the rest of the people in Canada, we hope to continue to make our contribution to the welfare of the people of this country. I would close by

The Address-Mr. Laing saying that, as the saying goes, Canada has hitched her wagon to a star. That star is the north star, because we are living in the north. It is the same star that guided the early mariner, the same star followed by the farmer at night who lives some distance from the town. He sees the big dipper make a complete revolution around that north star during the course of twelve hours, so that he can tell the time at night by the north star and the big dipper just as readily as he can by the sun when it is shining.
That is the time in working the farmer goes by. They go by the day, not by the hours. And so we make our effort in the hope that the people of our country will continue to receive favourable consideration from all members of the House of Commons, all the people of Canada. We, in turn, hope to contribute to their added happiness and welfare.


Mr. Arthur Laing (Vancouver South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like first of all to offer a word of congratulation to the hon. member who has just spoken. I will have to tell him, however, that I shall not be able, at least in one particular, to emulate either him or any of his seven American brothers.
First may I join with other hon. members in congratulating the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and the seconder (Mr. Simmons) of the address in reply. I must confess that I had to go to the English translations to realize what a splendid presentation was made by the hon. member for Beauharnois (Mr. Cauchon). I know the background of the hon. member for Yukon-Mackenzie River (Mr. Simmons), and I know more of the country from which he comes. In my view he made an excellent presentation of the case for northern Canada. I think he indicated that those young people for whom the future admonition will probably be, "Go north, young man", would do well if they were to go west before going north.
When the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) spoke in the debate he had something to say about what has been described as our most serious and, indeed, our only serious domestic problem, namely the cost of living and the results of inflation. He extended an invitation to all members of all parties to participate in the debate, so that out of it we would arrive at some judgment as to the best course to pursue. I would be bold indeed if I attempted to add very much to what I thought was an exceedingly able and striking speech on the subject delivered on October 18 by the hon. member for Coast-Capilano (Mr. Sinclair). There may have been in his young and expanding family some rejoicing

that night, but I want to tell him that there was rejoicing also in other British Columbia families who have known him and who have watched with keen appreciation his progress in the public service in recent years.
I do not want to deal with the subject from the standpoint of an economist. For a moment however I should like to discuss the amendment offered by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew) and the subamendment by the leader of the C.C.F., the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell). The leader of the opposition apparently has now abandoned all call for controls. There was a time when he was going about the country asking for controls which were to be innocuous but effective, nebulous but full of light, designed to do harm to no one but good to everyone.
Now, apparently, probably as a result of the fact that a responsible section of the press which supports him has advised him that it was not his responsibility to tell the government how to improve things, he merely points out that things are bad, but has abandoned his advocacy of controls.
I think the leader of the C.C.F., and his group, probably caused the leader of the opposition some embarrassment when, in their subamendment, they elected to complete his sentence. They have gone so far as to suggest provisions for price controls and the payment of subsidies. I would like the C.C.F. group now to admit that, if we are going into the realm of subsidies, we are going into the realm of rationing. I would like them to admit that, implicit in any consideration of subsidies, is the introduction of rationing. Of course it is. And I hope that in this debate they will admit they are in favour of rationing-because we have had that in the past in this country.


Mr. Maclnnis:: We still have it. I say we still have it-rationing by the purse. Are you in favour of that?


Arthur Laing: My hon. friend from Vancouver East will not say we have rationing after I have finished reading some of these articles which indicate the type of rationing we had in 1942. Not all people have kept a record of the operations of the wartime prices and trade board, and what people were subjected to in those days; and I do not think the people would want it today.


Donald MacInnis: Were you opposed to that?


Arthur Laing: I will deal with that when I get further along in my speech.


Donald MacInnis: It will be easier then.


Arthur Laing: Yes, it will. I would like an admission from the C.C.F. that rationing is

implicit in any consideration of the payment of subsidies. If you subsidize an article you provide that article to the people at a cheaper cost than would otherwise be the case. If you put a subsidized article on the market without rationing you are going to make it available to a greater degree to those with the most money. That is inevitable.
Many of us have short memories. The hon. member who just spoke reminded us of the difficulties the farmers of Canada have had in recent years, but I think the farmers of this country have done exceptionally well. There is some envy in some parts of the country over how well the farmers have been doing in recent years. My riding is made up of people who are consumers of farm products, but I tell the people there that I do not envy the farmers at all. I think it is one of the happiest circumstances we could have in Canada that the farmers are doing so well in recent years.
I can remember in 1941 when eggs were about eighteen cents a dozen and we were debating whether we could achieve a price of $1.25 per bushel for wheat. Am I not right? It would appear therefore that the farmers have had only eight or nine relatively good years in the recent history of Canada. I think we must admit that there are two things that keep the internal economy of this country together. One is the high rate of wages and the other is the annual farm income. If we maintain a proper balance between those two sections of the economy we will do very well in maintaining this country.
I spoke of short memories. I have dug up some of the old wartime prices and trade board orders of 1941 and 1942 and in these days they make extremely strange reading. Order 97 dealt with the frosting, icing and sugar-dusting of bakery products. It was illegal to frost and dust bakery products. Here is one that had to do with the cost of living bonus. We had a cost of living bonus by order of the board which limited the bonus to be paid at that time, August 6, 1942, to an increase of 60 cents per week. That was an invasion of the rights and responsibilities ordinarily assumed by the people. The government went as far as to say how much bonus could be paid weekly. If we invade such-rights and push in the economy in one place, as is proposed by the C.C.F., you have to expand that control over the entire economy. It is a fixed economy that they are asking for.
In those days we had manpower control and it was illegal for an employer to hire or release a technician without informing the director, and technicians were required to notify the director if they made a move.
The Address-Mr. Laing Contracts of employment for technicians required the approval of the minister. Then there were penalties provided for the breach of the regulations and the final word was that the regulation was then in effect. You had there an invasion of what under normal circumstances we would consider private rights.
Then there was a wartime salaries order dated March 4, 1942. There were various administrative orders. Order 142 dealt with the maximum prices of dressed horsehair. Order 146 dealt with the variation of and maximum rentals for hotel accommodation and so on.


Donald MacInnis: Was horsehair rationed?


Arthur Laing: I do not know. This had to do with the maximum price of horsehair. Order 204 concerned the maximum jobber's prices for feathers. Order 208 referred to the labelling of mirrors and so on, probably that we might better see ourselves as others see us. Order 230 dealt with the restriction of the manufacture and sale of new paper dress patterns. Another had to do with the delivery of ice, but there are no comments on the personal conduct of the iceman although that may have been in the original order. Another has to do with birch and maple flooring, and another has to do with the maximum price for bicycles.
At that time there was a tremendous invasion of many of the things which, thank goodness, we are still privileged to carry on by private action. The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) is about to ask me: Do you not say that the controls instituted by the Liberal government of that day were effective and successful, that they were the finest in the world?


Donald MacInnis: I did not say that.


Arthur Laing: You should.


Mr. Knowles:: Who is making this speech?


Arthur Laing: I remember Victoria day, 1940. Those were grim days. We held a celebration in my community and thank goodness most of the children there did not know what was in the newspapers and they were able to enjoy themselves. Those were the harsh and triumphant and miraculous days of Dunkirk. If anything brought home to Canadians the danger in which they were, it was the days of Dunkirk. That knowledge continued throughout the war and Canadians were therefore happy to accept restrictions upon their private lives such as they would not be agreeable to accepting today. If the C.C.F. think that Canadians are prepared to accept restrictions on their private activities, they should tell the public of Canada that they think so. I do not think we can have the

The Address-Mr. Laing application of subsidies in this country without the over-all fixing of the economy, precisely as we had in 1942.
Today there are throughout the world many governments which are more than anxious to get their thumbs and fingers on the throats of their people. In these days it is good for Canadians to realize that we have a Prime Minister and government who will use such methods only as a last resort instead of the first thing coming into their minds.
I should like to say a word concerning a matter which has not been given justice in this house so far. I hope such justice will be given before we go home at Christmas. The Old Age Security Act is a monument in Canadian history. We have arrived at the time when we are going to pay a pension, moderate it is true, to every Canadian without any strings attached, without any means- test. Any project which involves expenditures of the nature outlined last week by the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin) is a monumental piece of legislation for any country regardless of size.
Already we are hearing suggestions made in the house that the payment is not large enough. There are indications that in another general election we shall have parties bidding against one another. I hope that that does not occur because it would be a bad thing for Canada and its people. We possess many valuable rights in this country. We have maintained equality of access to the courts. We have enjoyed broad political rights. There seems to be a new sense of economic right belonging to the individual. This can only be based upon a partnership between the government, on the one hand, and industry, on the other.
I am going to say that I think the only prerequisite to national greatness in this country is industrial peace, and I think the industries of Canada should be prepared to pay more for industrial peace than they have in the past. I think there should be a partnership between the government on one hand and industry on the other. We see it already at work, and I hope that government action in the future will be such as to make it easier, namely, the proposal to amend the annuities act and the suggestion of the minister when he spoke on the integration of employee pensions with the old age pension scheme. I think those two policies for looking after our people in retirement should march along parallel to one another.
It has been suggested in some quarters that the government should accept full responsibility for the retirement of all its people. If we have that I think we are on the road


to socialism. Other people contend that industry should look after all its people and see that they are retired comfortably. If you do that I think you will put such a weight upon industry today that our selling prices in foreign markets will be affected. I think that we can handle this thing on a dual basis which will make unnecessary either of these cataclysmic events.
For a few moments I want to speak of a problem which is of deep concern to the city of Vancouver, and I want to address my remarks to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier). It has to do with Vancouver's international airport. In 1929 the city purchased some 475 acres of land on Sea island and began to develop an airport there. In the minds of many people at that time it was a premature move but I think there has been ample evidence since to show that the civic officials were quite sound in their anticipation of the requirements of aviation. We have there today a most excellent airport. Most of its development took place subsequent to 1940. Many millions of dollars have been invested by the federal government. The city still retains the administration of the airport although in 1945 they were offered the opportunity of turning it over to federal control.
At that time they elected to retain administrative control but they have now decided that they would much prefer to have the federal government operate the airport. I am of the opinion that international airports, and this is veritably an international airport, should have their finances based upon the broadest possible tax base, which is the Dominion of Canada. The airport is servicing United Air Lines which is a foreign company. Trans-Canada Air Lines and Canadian Pacific Air Lines are giving most excellent service in that area. In addition, the airport is the base for some splendid private company such as Queen Charlotte Air Lines and Vancouver Air Lines, which are providing an excellent and expanding service to all parts of the province of British Columbia. Our province is ideally suited for air travel. There are many places which take twenty-eight to thirty hours to reach by train but which can be reached in two hours by airplane.
In comparison with other airports in Canada, on the basis of passengers and freight carried and on the basis of income from the airport I think we have unquestionably at Sea island the most important airport in the Dominion of Canada. In the last six months 1,400 passengers per day have departed from that airport. There was a magnificent performance under circumstances which were of

great importance to the city of Vancouver. At one time both railways were out of operation, and in one twenty-four hour period no less than 3,000 pasengers passed through the airport. Recently when the forests were opened up after the long dry spell, within four hours no less than 850 loggers were moved out of that airport to the camps. It is a most excellent airport and is doing a magnificent job not only for Vancouver alone but in the whole development of Canadian air travel.
One matter has not been referred to by anyone with respect to the airport and that is its position in the Pacific airlift. When security measures no longer make it impossible, I think a tremendous story will be told of the co-operation between the great McChord field outside Tacoma and the Vancouver international airport in sustaining the Pacific airlift. At the present time the mayor and aldermen of the city of Vancouver and the Minister of Transport are some distance apart in their negotiations. I think they are about $1 million apart. When negotiations are renewed with the minister very shortly, I would ask him to give the kindest consideration to the representations of the city of Vancouver which is now desirous of turning the airport over to the Dominion of Canada. They want to get back the capital expenditure they have put into it, and that is all they want.
I, like the last speaker from western Canada, should like to say something about the St. Lawrence waterway. When that project comes before the house I hope no western member will find it necessary to oppose it. The Dominion of Canada has taken the lead in this venture and I hope that it keeps the lead. I do not think it is necessary to share the responsibility of the venture with our great neighbour to the south. I think in these times when we relate our efforts to theirs, when they are doing magnificent things, it is imperative that we as Canadians should do large and magnificent things. I think our future security and our relations with all other nations in the world will be better preserved thereby. We can do magnificent things, and I think we should hold the initiative.
The justification for the Canadian government taking such action is that the advantages and results of that development will accrue to all the people of Canada, and the sooner we realize that a development of that magnitude in one part of Canada is going to serve all Canada the sooner we will have a more closely knit and more united Canada. I bring up the subject only because the great new industrial development in
The Address-Mr. Laing this country is going to occur in western Canada. We as western members are going to have to come here in the years ahead and ask all members of the house for the same type of support and co-operation that I hope we can now give with respect to the St. Lawrence waterway.
Today in the province of British Columbia we have the second largest undeveloped resource of water power, the cheapest cost of development of water power per horsepower on this continent, and probably the greatest resources in the world, within a comparable area, of wood and wood products, and we have the great and magnificent province of Alberta next to us which I feel is going to be one of the great industrial centres of the world as time goes on. They have there in abundance coal, oil, natural gas, salt, limestone and iron ore.


An hon. Member:: Sulphur.


Arthur Laing: Yes, they have sulphur too.


James Sinclair: Beef.


Arthur Laing: They have every component, muscle and fibre of industry. We need more people. We need an integration of the economy of these two western provinces, and it is going ahead naturally. I should like to see us give some official impetus to it, and I do not make the call particularly in this house because it is up to these two western provinces to take a greater initiative than they have thus far. We could include the province of Saskatchewan.
People investigating there are of the opinion that a great body of oil exists in Saskatchewan as well. I think it unfortunate that the government in Saskatchewan has introduced certain legislation which hangs like a Damoclean sword over those who would invest money there. But I have every confidence, sir, that the reserves will last far beyond the tenure of the present government. Saskatchewan too can be incorporated in a western industrial development.


Mr. Thatcher:: They would not want it.


Arthur Laing: There is another great resource there, a resource which I think centres around Unity, Saskatchewan. I hope our new departments of Resources and Development and Mines and Technical Surveys will co-operate with the present provincial government in the development of that great proven body of potash in that area. The stuff is worth $30 a ton when you get it to the surface, and I understand there is a tremendous body of it there.
I feel that within these western provinces we have an opportunity for industrialization

The Address-Mr. Nowlan and for the integration, first of all, of our own provincial economies within the country.
I think we have an opportunity of industrialization and development there to support vast populations in happiness quite beyond the possibility in any other similar area upon the face of the earth today. So I make that appeal to western members. I ask them to try to see their way clear to support the vast development which is projected for central Canada, because we will benefit out of that also. Then the time will come for the governments to look west; and I am going to say this. I think this government so far has looked very kindly upon western Canada. I am not unmindful of the tremendous development of the aluminum company in British Columbia at the present time, which will involve some $500 million of new capital investment. Particularly the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe), as a single individual, I feel has done more than any other individual in Canada to ensure that development.
We have vast additional opportunities for development, and in those two or three western provinces we can support more than the present population of Canada. There is no question about that. When we come down and ask for these things I think we shall have the same kind of hearing from all parts of Canada that we as westerners will be able to give to the consideration of regional matters, which in the long run will mean advantage to us in all parts of Canada.


Mr. G. C. Nowlan (Annapolis-Kings):: Mr. Speaker, at the outset let me join with the others who have preceded me in congratulations to the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and seconder (Mr. Simmons) of the motion which is the subject matter of this debate, and to those who have taken part in it. I am thinking particularly of the four new members of the House of Commons who have made their maiden speeches during this debate. I am sure everyone will admit that the contribution they made and the promise they showed in taking part in the debate augurs well for their future participation in the proceedings of the house. We have already had two able addresses this afternoon, and if I do not attempt to follow the two speakers who immediately preceded me, and deal with any matters to which they referred, it certainly is no reflection upon the quality of their efforts or the manner in which they delivered their speeches.
Reference has been made in this debate to a survey of the natural resources of this country; and in this debate as well as in others much has been said about decentralization of industry. These two matters, Mr. Speaker, are of particular importance to

those of us in the maritime provinces and of course elsewhere in Canada. We do have natural resources in the maritimes. Perhaps they are not on the lavish scale that has just been elaborated upon by the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Laing); nevertheless we have those which are already developed and others which undoubtedly require development and could be developed further. For instance, in Nova Scotia we have the one steel industry in Canada which provides the three basic elements necessary for that industry, namely coal, iron ore and limestone. There are those here who have had association with that industry and particularly know the possibilities of its development. Undoubtedly there are many others which either have been developed or could be developed; but, Mr. Speaker, perhaps one of our most important resources is our natural geographic position on the eastern seaboard of this country, projecting out into the Atlantic like a wharf. With the exception of our new sister or brother province of Newfoundland we look further to the east than virtually any other part of this continent. Goods from Nova Scotia may be shipped to ports in Europe or throughout the world more economically, more efficiently and with a shorter haul than from any other part of this country. That is a natural resource which should be developed, and which should be the subject of further study.
Today we are in the midst of a war economy, a cold war it is true. Nevertheless we are producing goods, we say, for the defence of this nation. They are being produced largely in Ontario and Quebec. We all remember the last war. We remember the congestion of the railways and the terrific problems of railway management. It was only by superhuman efforts that they were dealt with at all. Surely, Mr. Speaker, given intelligent direction, given careful surveys, many industries in the maritimes could be producing goods for national defence. Instead of shipping them by rail for hundreds of miles you could load them almost from plant to ship on the adjoining dock. I believe that is a possibility which should be considered in any survey that is made of this nation. If sanity ever returns to the world there are undoubtedly many, many plants, English plants, plants from France, industries generally in Europe, that would establish branch plants in the maritimes because of their geographical position. If the imperial preference is to be maintained in any way, then undoubtedly there are American plants as well which would establish industries within that area, taking advantage of the preference in order to ship their

goods to the markets ol the commonwealth and throughout the world.
Latterly much has been said about the worsening trade conditions with the commonwealth, and particularly with the United Kingdom. It is not for us to comment upon political changes in any other nation, but I think we all realize that owing to changes which have taken place within the last week an atmosphere may develop with respect to trade between this country and Britain different from that which has prevailed during the past few years; at least there is that probability. That should be surveyed. It is for that reason that we from the maritimes welcome the suggestion which was made by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon), and by others in this house, of a survey of our natural resources. When that survey is made I believe much of benefit will be established.
It may be said that in Nova Scotia we have not the power for industry. We have sufficient power, Mr. Speaker, for existing industries and for a very substantial development. It is true that if it developed excessively as much as we might optimistically hope, there might be shortages of hydroelectric power as it is developed at the present time. I sometimes wonder if we are not living too much in the past and do not look ahead with the imagination that today requires. Canada is a country of the future. When we talk about power the day may not be too far away when this nation will not have to depend entirely upon hydroelectric power or power produced by coal. I read in the press that in the United States plans have been made recently for the production of submarines powered by atomic energy. If atomic energy can be so harnessed that it can be used safely and effectively within the narrow confines of a submarine, then what are its possibilities for industrial development? In a magazine last week I read that the only way one could possibly contemplate developments in this field would be to think of the Kitty Hawk aeroplane of the Wright brothers being converted into a B-29 bomber within three years. A development similar to the one which has taken the aeroplane industry a quarter of a century to evolve has taken place in the atomic energy field within the last three years. There is no question, Mr. Speaker, but that some day this source of energy will be available for industrial power. Then, in so far as power in the maritimes is concerned, coupled with our geographical position and given proper leadership and direction that would place the maritimes in a position where their prosperity would compare with that which existed many, many years ago.
The Address-Mr. Nowlan
Turning to another matter for a moment, I am sure the members of this house were delighted with the statement by the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Lapointe) that changes are going to be made in the pensions given to veterans. It is a surprising statement, but one which every member of the house receives with pleasure. It represents an amazing change from the attitude taken last June when this house was about to adjourn. Then the door was closed to the veterans, but now it has been opened suddenly. This proves that this government, though it moves slowly and is lethargic, can be moved if sufficient pressure is brought to bear. The action taken by the veterans organizations throughout this nation, by the various opposition groups here, and undoubtedly by members on the other side of the house as well, has accomplished something for the veteran which is well worth while.
There is one further step which should be taken at this session. Reference was made by the member for Vancouver South (Mr. Laing) to this magnificent old age pension legislation which was introduced the other day. With that we concur. The old age pension legislation, Mr. Speaker, has removed the means test in so far as millionaires are concerned, but it retains it for the recipients of veterans allowances. Those veterans who are burnt out, who are in most dire need, will findi a conflict between veterans allowance legislation and the old age pension legislation. It will put them in a different class from any other citizens in Canada. There is no excuse. It is no answer, Mr. Speaker, to say "Oh, well, consideration will be given to this at another session, and the legislation can be made retroactive. They will get the payment by and by". That is not an answer because the veteran may be dead before that day comes. In any case, that does not pay the coal bill this winter. There is no reason in the world why this government could not, at this session, pass legislation wiping out this one difference between the recipients of war veterans allowances and other pensioners in Canada. I am sure such a measure would receive unanimous approval. I have no objection to classifying old age payments as income for income tax purposes. But I do object to classifying it as income and thereby denying the war veterans allowance recipient payments he would otherwise receive. If the government do not take that action they will have been recreant in their duty to the veterans.
There is one other matter in connection with the administration of veterans affairs that I should like to mention. Last spring this parliament, after considerable debate and lengthy

The Address-Mr. Nowlan discussion in committee, adopted what was known as an unemployability supplement for veteran pensioners. You will recall that the basic principle was that pensioners had to be in receipt of a substantial pension, but I think it was 35 per cent for unmarried and 40 per cent for married; they must be unemployed and that unemployment must be directly attributable to their disability. In other words, one could say that all those who received the unemployability supplement earned it. They paid for it by their disability. What do we find? We find a regulation by the department whereby that supplement will not be paid to any person, otherwise qualified, who is living outside of Canada. I do not think that regulation should be there. As I say, I believe the veterans have bought and paid for their right to the payment by their disability. If they want to live in Mexico or on the isle of Capri, that is their privilege.
Even if the government or the house will not go that far with me, I would suggest this as a matter of common sense and decency. Many of these people are now living out of the country on doctors' orders. It is hoped that by living perhaps in California or Arizona, where certain climatic conditions exist, their condition may be alleviated. I have brought to the attention of the minister one or two of those cases, and I have others in my constituency. I do say that even if the department will not go so far as to permit this payment to be made to all those living outside the country-as I think they should- then certainly I urge that the payment be made to those who are living out of the country who can produce a certificate from a qualified medical man stating they are living there on the doctor's advice. It seems to me that is a reasonable suggestion. I know one man living in California on a pension. He is there on the doctor's advice. He was the commander of a corvette and was being carried by bomber to take over the command of another corvette. The aeroplane heating system broke down and he froze. They thought he was dead when they took him out of the aeroplane, but he survived and the doctor sent him to California. He is living there on a pension of $125 per month, and he has been denied this unemployability supplement. I brought the matter to the attention of the department, and I know the minister took a sympathetic view. Action is being considered, but action can be delayed so long that it is dilatory.
Much has been said in this debate about the cost of living, and it is rather difficult to find anything original to say about it. In his excellent address the other day the member
[Mr. Nowlan.l

for Red Deer (Mr. Shaw) pointed out that it is the number one topic in the minds of the people of Canada. It ranks higher than any other subject, and whether or not we like it, it is paramount in the minds of the citizens we represent. It is certainly paramount in the minds of the people of the maritimes, because undoubtedly the incidence of inflation is greater on some people than on others. We have heard this afternoon about the vast resources of British Columbia and Alberta, and the great wealth that is undoubtedly there. We know about the tremendous employment and the inflationary spiral that has been caused in the province of Ontario. There are other parts of Canada in which those factors do not apply. Nevertheless those parts of the country have to pay the costs without getting what you might call the benefits which others get from this inflation. I think there is one thing that can be fairly said, Mr. Speaker; that is that the people of Canada are getting weary of this monotonous chant that the people have too much money and something must be done, that it is the government's responsibility to take the money away from them. I should like to know who has too much money, Mr. Speaker. There are undoubtedly individuals who, either by accident or otherwise, or perhaps because of ability, have made tremendous fortunes during the last few years. But for everyone who has done that there are thousands in this country who are suffering hardships today. Certainly those of us who sit on this side of the house, Mr. Speaker, do not know those men or women who have so much money in their pockets that it has to be taken away from them. The hon. member for Maple Creek (Mr. Studer) told us that earlier this afternoon in his fiery oration, when he said he did not know who they were. But we constantly hear that statement about the people having too much money. There was once an English statesman whose name I forget, but I read a biography of his in which he was discussing the disabilities of the life of a cabinet minister. Someone suggested to him: "I do not know how cabinet ministers live on the salaries they receive", and he said: "There are other compensations. We sit with the mighty, and we dine with millionaires every night." I am not suggesting that this is true of the members of our Canadian cabinet, Mr. Speaker, but certainly they must meet far more millionaires than we do, because we do not know them on this side of the house.
I have in my hand here an editorial from the Halifax Chronicle-Herald dealing with

The Address-Mr. Nowlan
this matter. It is entitled "A Chant That Is Getting Monotonous" and goes on to say in part as follows:
It is a curious attitude and so remote from realities of Canadian families everywhere that one wonders in what kind of a world some of these government spokesmen are living. Do they ever meet ordinary people? Have they talked to heads of families, to householders who are worried to distraction with family budget problems?
Surely, if they understood how so many of us feel, they could not continue to repeat this unrealistic cant about the people having too much money. It seems, rather that they are dwelling in some sort of ivory tower, remote from the harsh realities which have become so unpleasantly familiar to many Canadians.
I think that must be the explanation, Mr. Speaker; they are living in ivory towers. They are removed from reality if they believe what they say, and I do not question their sincerity. They are removed from the plight of the common people in this country, the plight of the housewives who, if their husbands are engaged in heavy industry and they have to buy additional meat, must shorten up the milk ration for the kiddies because they cannot buy both. The same thing applies to the price of shoes, clothing or whatever it may be. That condition exists in the homes of thousands and thousands of Canadians throughout this country. They are being ground between the millstones of taxation and rising costs and deflated dollars. Something more must be done about it than simply say that there is just too much money in this country, that we have to take it away from you by taxation.
Another rather monotonous statement is that there are too few goods. Where is there evidence of there being too few goods? Are the grocery shelves empty? Are the automobile showrooms bare? What about the electrical supply stores? Do you see a shortage of refrigerators or washing machines or electrical stoves? Where is this shortage of goods of which we hear so much? In making this monotonous statement the government have adopted the classical phrase which may have been correct in the free economy years ago, that inflation was due to too many dollars chasing too few goods. In this case there are not too many dollars and there are not too few goods. Instead of there being too many dollars or too much money, Mr. Speaker, there is too much complacency on the part of this government; and in place of there being too few goods there is too little action on the part of the government. That is largely responsible for the inflation as we see it today.
Let us recall the days of the war. All of us can do that. Let us remember the days from 1941 to 1945. The hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Laing) read some of the restrictions which were in effect then. I do not question
them, but I also want to point out this fact. During those years the cost of living index rose from 111-7 to 118. That was all it rose in four years of war. We held the line. The government held the line. Do you remember when the Hamilton steelworkers suggested that they wanted an increase in wages and there was talk of a strike for a few days in the steel industry? What happened then? Mr. Donald Gordon and the late prime minister, Right Hon. Mackenzie King, and the cabinet were in a tizzy. They had to hold the line at all costs, and they did. Who talks of holding the line today? The line has gone from 118 up to something like 190, and nothing is done. Even King Canute was carried out in a chair to tell the tides to stop. He did not do a very good job of it, but he tried to do something. This government has forgotten all about the drive, initiative and energy it showed during the war. I think they wore themselves out. In this matter of the cost of living they show the same nervous energy of a flock of tired old butterflies. That is the situation.
In matters of finance, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) budgeted for a surplus of $30 million, and ends up with a surplus of $500 million.


An hon. Member:: In five months.


George Clyde Nowlan: Yes, in five months, as my hon. friend says; from $30 million to $500 million. And he says: "I did not realize the forces of inflation. I did not allow for them." What is the job of the Minister of Finance if it is not to allow for such things? What is he paid for? He has the experts of this whole country at his beck and call. He has the benefit of the advice of experts not only in his own department but in all other departments, including the Bank of Canada and all the rest of it. When he says "I did not study my charts," may I ask this question. If you had a pilot, Mr. Speaker, who was making a navigational plot and he did not study his charts, particularly with regard to storms which were appearing on the horizon, that pilot would be fired. In this case our pilot apparently studied the ouija board instead of his charts.


James Sinclair: May I ask the source of my hon. friend's quotation?


George Clyde Nowlan: I have no quotations. That is original with the hon. member for Annapolis-Kings, if the hon. member for Coast-Capilano really wants to know. And I will give him another original one dealing with this department. I will tell him that the only man who ever made a greater mistake in navigation or computation than that made by the minister

The Address-Mr. Nowlan was wrong-way Corrigan, who set out for California and ended up in Ireland. That is also original.


James Sinclair: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member still has not given the source of these quotations which he expressed so glibly, as to the minister saying he had not read his charts.


George Clyde Nowlan: I never said the minister said that he had not read his charts. I said the minister said in effect that he had not read his charts.


James Sinclair: Oh, in effect.


George Clyde Nowlan: It certainly was the effect. The hon. member for Coast-Capilano was talking about everybody having too much money, so apparently he has not felt the effects the rest of us have felt. It is no wonder that the hon. member for Coast-Capilano, who is in fairly close association with the government, talks about people having too much money, because the government with which he is associated is the only one which has a surplus of $500 million. As the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) pointed out the other day in his speech, despite the pledges of economy, despite the professions of faith we heard here last spring that economies were being shown across the board, what do we find? Every non-defence department is still spending more money than it spent last year. The people are exhorted to save. The good book has an injunction: Physician, heal thyself. Until the departments of government apply that exhortation to save to their own departments it is going to be rather difficult for the people to apply it. One could dwell on the matter longer, but I do not want to take up more of the time of the house.
There has been talk about using this money for debt reduction. I am not going to discuss that point, but I would suggest there are other ways in which it could be spent more effectively. I hope everyone has read the report of the Massey commission. It is certainly a document which ought to be studied. It reflects tremendous credit on the commission, and I believe will be read more widely as the years go by. I want to join with the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Knight) in all he said a few days ago about implementing certain parts of the report of that royal commission. Grants to universities, a system which this government has already instituted, are good. Further steps along that line should be taken, because the plight of the universities in this country-most certainly the smaller ones-is just as serious as the plight of the individual.
Then, referring again to the individual, let me point out that today, and markedly this year, student registration has fallen off. This


must mean that there are scores and hundreds of young men and women throughout Canada who are unable, for economic reasons, to register in universities. The universities have raised their fees fairly consistently during the past few years. That, together with living costs, has cut down the number of applications to a dangerous level in many universities throughout Canada. That is bad enough for a university but it is much worse for a nation, the youth of which are denied the opportunity of entering our universities. I do hope the government will give consideration to the establishment of national scholarships on a very wide scale, and that it will be done soon. Part of this $500 million spent in that way would do far more good for this nation, not only now but in generations to come, than any other expenditure that could be made.
I hope every member of the House of Commons will read the report, and particularly that section which deals with .the archives, our national records. The situation there disclosed is, to say the least, not a happy one. We find that away back in 1912 a royal commission of that time said there was over 1,629,000 cubic feet of floor space used by all records, many of which had not been sorted or classified since confederation. The report of the royal commission now before us says the situation has become worse. We find, for example, that the Department of Public Works is using over 350,000 square feet of floor space to store records of various kinds which have accumulated throughout the years. When one realizes that the Confederation building, a nine-storey building, has only 190,000 square feet of space, and that the Department of Public Works is using 350,000 square feet, he begins to realize the confusion there must be in respect to these records, half of which, according to the commission report, should be destroyed at once. In many cases the Department of Public Works is paying $1 per square foot for this floor space-350,000 square feet: $350,000. And half of this, according to the royal commission should be destroyed. A saving could be effected to the extent of $175,000 a year, if those records were put into proper shape.
I suggest to the minister that, as building materials are in short supply today, out of this $500 million the government should buy some of its own savings bonds and set them to one side, so the fund could be used to build a national archives building. As soon as materials are in free supply again the government could go ahead with the construction. Not only is it essential from the

standpoint of our cultural life, but it would also be a good investment from the standpoint of dollars and cents.
My reference to shortages of materials leads me to one other subject, namely the matter of credit controls, concerning which I should like to speak briefly. In this field the government has gone a long way. In fact, they have gone farther-I suggest they have gone too far-than they have gone in any other field. Hon. members are familiar with the situation that developed in Canada. Every help and encouragement was given to the development of our economy. The government, anticipating deflation, directed the affairs of the country, and did not rectify the condition when we were sliding into inflation. It did nothing until we had a conflagration in our economy. Then it erected a roadblock in the form of credit controls, against which trade was supposed to smash itself to pieces.
While the government has refused to follow the United States in many things, in this instance it went much further. In the United States there are credit controls in connection with instalment buying. I speak from memory, but I believe that over there they pay one-third down and have eighteen months in which to pay the balance. On the other hand, in Canada we are required to pay down 50 per cent, and have only twelve months to pay the balance. That is all right for the millionaire; it is all right for wealthy people. It is fine for the man who buys the Cadillac and who will have money enough to pay for it. But the farmer or the labourer in any of our constituencies who must buy a secondhand car in which to travel to his work or his office finds that he has not the 50 per cent down payment. Surely there could be some relaxation in this. It has created a real hardship affecting many people in Canada, and particularly the younger people who are trying to establish homes and furnish apartments. They cannot buy refrigerators, stoves or any other commodities because of these credit controls.
Those controls should not be abolished, but they should be relaxed, and relaxed' now. And, because of other indirect controls exercised through the Bank of Canada, bank credits have been denied, with the result that small businesses have been placed in a most perilous situation. Many of them are threatened with bankruptcy. Then we know of other businesses supplying the electrical and automotive industries. Real disaster stares these small businessmen in the face. Surely that was not the intention of the government, and I do suggest that some action should be taken to rectify the situation.
The Address-Mr. George
More than that, why should these controls be applied uniformly across the dominion? Inflation is regional. We see heights of it in some provinces, and at least valleys in others. Yet these controls, like the ten commandments, appear to be printed on tablets of stone, and are forced inexorably upon everyone regardless of financial position. We have regional arrangements in other matters, and in this connection I think of the financial arrangements with the provinces. Some provinces sign agreements while others do not, but it is all done on a regional basis. There are all sorts of precedents for this regional treatment, in every other field of government. I am confident that credit controls could be administered on a regional basis just as efficiently as they are now, and that the results would be much more beneficial to all people concerned.
I have spoken longer than I had intended. The hon. member who preceded me in the debate painted a vision of the future with respect to his part of the country, and I would subscribe to what he said. Despite the difficulties about which I have spoken, despite the hardships and all the rest of it, not only for his part of the country but the whole nation I believe the future is unlimited indeed. All we need is leadership and direction and a determination such as we have shown in the past. Given those qualities, despite the apparent difficulties of the day, those who come after us will live in a happier and better Canada than we have ever known.


Mr. E. W. George (Westmorland):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to join with those who have preceded me in the debate in complimenting the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and seconder (Mr. Simmons) of the address in reply. They did an excellent job; and while I had to read the translation of one of the speeches, I must say I was deeply impressed by it. Both hon. members reflected credit upon their constituencies.
Before continuing I should like to thank the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) for the trip he arranged for members of parliament and senators who went to Camp Borden last Saturday. We left here at nine o'clock in the morning from Rockcliffe airport, where aircraft were provided, and spent the day in Camp Borden visiting the military establishments at that point. May I pay tribute to Major General Graham and Group Captain Coleman who arranged our visit, for the excellent job they did in showing us through not only the army but the air force establishments. It was most informative not only to those of us who have some knowledge

The Address-Mr. George of what goes on, but more particularly those who have only slight knowledge of military affairs.
I should like to review briefly two things which I feel should be done to improve the economic situation of the maritime provinces.
I do not include the new province of Newfoundland because I know very little about it. There are many other subjects in connection with the economic situation in the maritimes and in Canada as a whole which I could discuss, but I feel that the two subjects I have chosen are the most important. While they are far apart, in one sense they are closely related.
The past of the maritimes is a matter of record and known to all. At one time we were the richest part of Canada; today we are the poorest. What might have happened without confederation will not be the subject of my remarks; enough to say that the days of the wooden ships are over. When the maritimes were first settled the primary industry was agriculture. Labour was supplied by the family, and practically nothing was imported. They even ground their own flour and made their own clothes. The great shipbuilding industry developed, and lumbering and fishing also helped the farmers to make a living. Comparatively heavy industrialization plus available markets in what is now the United States made the maritimes very prosperous.
Beef raising was the main agricultural pursuit and many boatloads of cattle were shipped to the United Kingdom, especially from the bay of Fundy area. The cattle were shipped alive, as refrigeration was unknown. It is interesting to note that in 1889 some 78 per cent of the population were on the farms raising food for themselves and for the other 22 per cent of the people. While none of them had much money, they owned their farms, were well fed and made happy and good citizens. Many of the younger people left for greener pastures, the same as they do today, but the picture was good. Western grains were unknown and the maritimes were selfsupporting. Then, as is the situation today, the maritimes were the best place in the world to live.
Let us have a look at the situation today. Apart from Prince Edward Island the maritimes are unable to feed themselves. Outside of potatoes we must import food in order to live. The maritimes, especially the area at the head of the bay of Fundy, used to raise large numbers of cattle. However, in the thirties the farmers lost considerable money and sold their herds. There was a good export market for hay at the time and the farmers


found it easier and more profitable to make a living raising hay. Today only those farmers producing fluid milk or raising beef can show a profit; the others depend upon lumbering, fishing, trucking, et cetera, to make up their deficits.
Crop failures this year in the maritimes have not helped. While seeding was late, we still had the heaviest crops in years. However, great areas were not harvested. It will be remembered that last year there was a surplus of potatoes. That necessitated dumping. A small subsidy was paid, for which we were all thankful, and this helped to ease the situation; but the fact is that the farmers lost a terrific amount of money.
Over the years Canada's economy has changed from agriculture to industry. Today in the United States there are five million fewer people on the farms than in 1889. The figures for Ontario-and these are probably true for the maritimes-show that in those days 78 per cent of the people were on the farms where today only 11 per cent of the population is producing food. It is interesting to note how improved methods and the use of efficient machinery enables fewer people each year to feed the population. In one area in Ontario this year there are ten thousand fewer cows than a year ago, yet the area is producing more milk than ever. All this does not add up to what we would like.
Outside of western grains, the production of foodstuffs i? on the decrease in relation to the increase in population. Canada is importing butter in increasing quantities every year. The maritimes must import a large percentage of the food needed by the people. Farmers cannot get help; therefore they are producing less. The 40-hour week plus high wages is taking most of the young men from the farms. It is an accepted fact that within ten years Canada will face a food shortage unless some direction is given, and quickly.
People are blaming the farmers for high food prices, but their cost of production has risen far more than the increase in food prices. The farmer lacks organized marketing facilities, and it is only the shortage of food that keeps farm prices high. As we all know, farmers cannot set the prices for what they produce; they must take what they can get. I believe there is a great future in the maritimes for agriculture. Outside of the market gardener, the small poultry farmer, the beekeeper and a few other specialists, the days of the small farm are over. I understand that a survey has been made in the maritimes with a view to determining what areas should be cultivated. I would hazard a guess that one-half the cleared land in the

maritimes should be reforested. As we all know, it is uneconomical to farm marginal land. The shortage of labour, along with the small margin of profit, makes necessary improved and efficient methods of farming through the increased use of machinery. The small farmer cannot afford to purchase this heavy machinery, because it is uneconomical with small acreages. It has been proved that the pooling of machinery is unsatisfactory.
As an idea of what machinery will cost the farmer with a medium size farm, the total cost of cultivating machinery, hay bailer and other haying tools, binder and so on is between $11,000 and $18,000. When you consider the cost of land, buildings, stock and so on, the total runs into a large figure. A change must be made in the type of farming carried on at the head of the bay of Fundy in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. I believe that is where the greatest future lies. As I mentioned before, for the last twenty-five years farmers in that area have been raising hay but there is now no market for hay and they must revert to cattle. These farmers find themselves with from 200 to 800 acres of hay land with no market for hay and no cattle. Those farmers in eastern Canada who have had cattle have been importing far too much western grain, and I cast no reflection upon western grain or those who raise it. We have not been using natural ensilage. Ensilage made from green grasses is the best livestock food in the world. The use of this, with some dry hay and very little grain, has cut the cost of production to the farmer, and means that he can also raise most of his own feed.. The marsh reclamation program developed by the federal government, in conjunction with the provincial governments, is reclaiming thousands of acres of land in the maritimes. No immediate use can be found for much of it unless the farms are restocked with cattle.
I come back to the second part of my argument. I should like to speak briefly about the St. Lawrence waterway and how it may affect the maritimes. Hon. members will understand why I said these two subjects were actually closely related, though at first sight they might seem to be far apart. I am not against building this waterway, but I feel there are certain points that should be brought to the attention of the government. The idea of the waterway is not new. It is the natural sequence of a continuous policy of development of the whole St. Lawrence system stemming back more than one hundred and sixty years. Canals do not get built by some such mythical process as that by which the children of Israel were fed on their flight from Egypt. Canals are built either by private enterprise in the hope of profit, the expectation of which would be entirely absent if no
The Address-Mr. George reasonable justification existed at the time, or by governments as the result of pressure exerted on them by voting constituents. Such pressure is not exerted unless there is a widespread demand for the particular public work in question.
The necessity for power and a larger ship canal has brought this about, and there is great demand for the development of the St. Lawrence waterway. This project involves the construction from Montreal to the open water of lake Superior of a ship canal, and it involves the improvement of the St. Lawrence river section both for navigation and power. It is understood that the large lake boats are not suitable for ocean traffic, but it is probable that they could reach the maritime province ports.
The benefits of this project to the maritimes are not immediately obvious but nevertheless are of the type that may make possible an orderly economic development of these provinces. The waterway is not a development concerning which the maritimes can remain indifferent. The two commodities which might benefit directly following the closer joining of Ontario and the maritimes are coal and steel. Both these products are being exported from the maritimes now to upper Canada, and due to the deepening of the channels may reach as far as Toronto. Other products which might also be shipped are seafoods, lumber, agricultural products, salt and gypsum. However, it must be remembered that the deepening of the seaway will also make Montreal marketing available to the upper lake boats from western Canada and the United States.
It is problematical if the demand for coal will increase because the increase of available electric power together with the diesel-ization of the railways is even now continuing to decrease the amount of coal required. It must be remembered that the real value of coal at Toronto or any other point is the cheapest figure at which good quality United States bituminous coal can be laid down at that point. It appears obvious that without some sort of subsidy Nova Scotia coal would never be shipped west of Montreal.
The establishment of a flour and grist mill at Sydney, Nova Scotia, has been under discussion for many years. I would refer the house to the report by a special select committee of the Nova Scotia legislature which studied this subject in 1930 under the chairmanship of Hon. Frank Stanfield, M.L.A. This report finds that it is rather doubtful if a flour mill would be established in the maritimes as a result of the building of the St. Lawrence waterway. One of the objects of establishing the mill would be to provide

The Address-Mr. George transportation tor maritime products to upper Canada on the return trip of the grain boats. One of the likely demands of the industrialized St. Lawrence basin will be for agricultural products furnished by the maritimes. A study of the St. Lawrence river and its tributary areas shows that the section roughly defined as between Kingston and Quebec city will develop into one of the greatest industrial areas in the world. The great increase in population which will result will have several interesting effects, and this is one of them. The agricultural areas lying behind the probable industrial area are very small. The Laurentian or PreCambrian cap goes down to within a comparatively short distance of Montreal and Kingston. Therefore the large population that will exist in these centres must be fed from comparatively distant agricultural areas. There are only two such areas to which the St. Lawrence valley could turn for agricultural supplies adequate to its needs, namely, the agricultural portions of the maritimes and Ontario.
The automotive industry was born in the interior of the country, and indirectly it helped to establish many other industries both closely and distantly related to motor cars. All these industries depended on coal and iron. The site was determined by the presence of large quantities of coal and by the reasonable accessibility of Michigan iron ore. We in the maritimes have great natural resources of coal, and iron ore from Labrador is easily available. There also great quantities of limestone in the maritimes.
The main feature worrying us today is the relationship of maritime to all-Canadian production. Records show that the trend of this ratio has gone down and is going steadily down. The conclusion we draw from the study of this problem is that the economic importance of the maritimes with relation to all Canada will probably continue to decrease as long as the major opportunities for personal economic advancement, exploitation of natural resources and general commercial development, lie in the centre and other parts of the dominion. The handicaps that bring about such an unfortunate result are the relative scarcity of the more important natural resources, average natural soil conditions which are not high, natural remoteness of markets where maritime resources could be sold, and the artificial remoteness because of tariffs of their closest natural markets, the New England states. The immediate removal or easing of this last handicap is outside the power of Canada at the moment, but the physical remoteness of the maritimes is to some extent a factor

controllable by changes in the cost of transportation. Therefore it is subject to government action, and such action in modifying the cost of transportation is entirely in conformity with several historic parallels. So the problem before Canada as a whole is, in those regions where such changes are possible, to decrease the economic handicaps or physical remoteness surrounding the maritimes to the degree that they are capable of being altered by human agencies. Only then can the maritime provinces be restored to their natural importance in the whole of Canada, and thus take that place in the realm of production which was expected by the fathers of confederation.
In my opinion there are several things that can be done to bring the maritime production average to the all-Canadian level. One of them is an immediate improvement in our agriculture. There is no better type of country in the world than an agricultural one, as is shown by the low countries of Europe, which are highly agricultural. On the whole, maritime agriculture is on a downward grade, and this will not bring prosperity. In my opinion all the marginal land in the maritimes should be reforested. Lumber is one of our main industries and always has been, but it is now in serious danger because of depletion. Federal assistance has already been offered to the provinces in this regard.
Loans from the Canadian farm improvement board and under the farm improvement act are too small under conditions existing today. Many farmers in the bay of Fundy area of the maritimes find themselves, as I said before, with from 200 to 800 acres of hay land, no market for their hay, and no cattle to eat the grass. To restock these farms is out of the question without financial assistance.
Marsh or dike land, which brought a price of over $200 an acre twenty-five years ago, is worth practically nothing today. Recently sales have brought from $5 to $25 an acre, this for land which grows grasses containing the highest protein of any in the world. No one will lend any amount of money on this type of real estate. You may say that the government's act of reclaiming this land has been a waste of money. That is not true. Parts of the world are starving today. It is predicted that in from ten to fifteen years every acre of land is going to be needed to feed the population. The potential value of this land at the head of the bay of Fundy is tremendous, and it will again be worth practically what it was twenty-five years ago. Let us say that a farm of 400 acres will support a minimum of 125 head of cattle. To restock

this farm today the farmer requires up to at least $25,000 plus his equipment and property, which he now owns, although he will require other special types of machinery for handling grass silage. I might say that this grass silage has been introduced into the maritimes in the last two or three years, and in the next two or three it probably will constitute the main type of feed for livestock. The financing of this type of work probably comes within provincial jurisdiction, but since the two lending agencies are controlled federally I feel that sufficient money should be made available immediately in order that the maritimes may get back on an export market in food, not only in cattle, but in other agricultural products. At the present rate of decrease in the cattle population of North America and the rapid increase of the human population, it is only a matter of time until beef will not be a part of our diet but will be used purely for medical extracts.
From the time the Canadian farm loan board was formed until 1935, the maximum amount which could be loaned on farm property was $10,000. In 1935 this amount was reduced to $5,000, plus an additional $1,000 on second and chattel mortgages. If the authorities were correct in making available $10,000 previous to 1935, then the figure today should be in the vicinity of at least $20,000. In addition to moneys lent by the farm loan board, it is possible to obtain up to $3,000 under the farm improvement loan legislation through the commercial banks. It is said that if this amount of money were made available the farmers would, no doubt, contribute greatly toward inflation, and the policy today, as we all know, is to limit credit. It is possible that certain sections of Canada, such as the maritimes, should receive additional credit to improve agriculture, and I believe that local conditions should be the controlling factor. If, as I have suggested previously, the maritimes will become a source of food for the industrial areas of Ontario and Quebec, the government should act now in order that food may be available when it is required, and also that the maritimes will once again regain an export status in agriculture.
Unless minerals or'oil are discovered in the maritimes, there will be no natural industrial development there. The maritimes are so far removed from the markets that transportation costs keep industries from being established there. No one will risk capital in an area so far from the centre of population. If we are ever to regain our proportion of the natural average of production, then industries must be built. We have one industry being built in my riding at the present time, a
The Address-Mr. George Canada Cement plant. That is being built purely as a matter of distribution. It is the only large industry that has been built in the maritimes in the last few years, so far as I am aware.
As I said previously, and as has been pointed out by other hon. members, we have an abundance of coal and limestone in the maritimes, and iron ore is easily accessible in Labrador. A surplus of power can be developed in the maritimes in several ways. The house will remember that in 1950 I spoke in the debate on the throne speech and mentioned the St. Mary's power project built by Walter Melanson of Moncton. My remarks may be found in Hansard, volume I of 1950, at page 716. This is a type of project which develops up to two million horsepower. Then there is the Quoddy project which was discussed here the other day by the hon. member for Saint John-Albert (Mr. Riley). It also will develop a surplus of power. There are other ways in which power can be made from coal. We have an excellent plant in Nova Scotia now, the Canadian Electric, which is producing power from powdered coal. We hear of developments going on, of burning coal in the ground. Russia is supposed to lead the world in that field today. We do not care where the power comes from so long as we get it. I think all maritime members will agree that we are not backing one power process ahead of another. All we want is power development.
Since there is a world steel shortage, it appears to me that the government could very well assist the maritimes by making available the necessary power, and by building a steel plant and the other plants that would go with it. As far as I can see, no other agency will ever build large industries there. The resultant industrialization of the maritimes, together with the construction of the St. Lawrence waterways, would make a canal from Northumberland strait to the bay of Fundy a necessity.
I repeat, we in the maritimes are not against the building of the St. Lawrence waterways or any other project that will benefit Canada. But we do feel that we are deserving of a production average at least equal to that of the rest of Canada, and we feel that the government is the only agency today which can make this possible. I am sure that the fathers of confederation never intended that it should be otherwise.


Mr. W. D. Wylie (Medicine Hat):: Mr. Speaker, my first words this afternoon must be those of congratulations to the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and seconder (Mr. Simmons) of the motion for an address in reply to the speech

The Address-Mr. Wylie from the throne. I was particularly interested in what the hon. member for Yukon-Mackenzie River (Mr. Simmons) had to say about that vast northern constituency which he represents. I have also listened many times to the leader of this group, the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Low), tell about the resources of that wonderful country and advise the government as to what should be done.
The other day I was very interested in a pamphlet I received from Alberta in connection with that north country. No doubt many hon. members know that fifteen years ago the residents of Fort Vermilion had only one means of access, you might say, to our world. The only means of travel they had was by vessel going up the Peace river, and back and forth. Unless their stock was ready at a certain time of the year they were forced to sell them when they were not ready for market. What has happened today? Through the co-operation of the provincial and dominion governments a highway has been built from Grimshaw in the Peace river country to Hay River on the southern shores of Great Slave lake. It runs for a distance of 384 miles through muskeg, timber and some good farm land. It is an all-weather highway. The residents of Fort Vermilion, 45 miles to the east of the present highway, have a secondary highway which they can use. The residents of Keg River, 12 miles west of this highway, can also use it to get their produce out. This is one forward step in the development of our northern areas.
We have not even started to develop our resources in western Canada, in the constituency represented by the member for Yukon-Mackenzie River (Mr. Simmons), and also in the constituency represented by the member for Cariboo (Mr. Murray). While we realize that the development of that area must continue through the assistance of the federal government, we must not overlook the fact that in southern and central Alberta there are many thousands of acres that could be developed through irrigation. They could be developed at a minimum cost so far as road building and schools are concerned. I believe the first thing we must do is develop those areas in which irrigation is possible. I know that both the Alberta government and the federal government have been doing a fair job in this respect. Perhaps some of my Saskatchewan friends, particularly the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher), will disagree with me because the South Saskatchewan project is not proceeding as it should. When I read the speech from the throne and saw that another commission was
[Mr. Wylia.l
being set up to study the South Saskatchewan project, it took me right back to Medicine Hat. Year after year I have stressed in this house the need for irrigation. I mentioned the trails being worn over the prairies by the various surveyors who have inspected these projects. I am sure some of the Saskatchewan members must feel the same way. There should be no need for another commission to study that project. Last session we were advised that it was feasible, and if it is feasible let us get on with the job.
I tried to follow one of the previous speakers, the hon. member for Maple Creek (Mr. Studer). I enjoyed his speech. While I do not agree with all he said, I must say that I never heard anyone talk so fast and say so much in such a short time. The only ones in the house for whom I did feel sorry were our Hansard reporters. When he told us of having seven brothers in the United States who talked faster than he did, I am sure that our very good reporters were hoping his brothers never entered the House of Commons. The hon. member's constituency adjoins mine on the east, and one thing I must say for him is that he has everything at his fingertips. He does not have to read his speech, it is right in him. Any time a member can get up and talk for 40 minutes as fast as the hon. member did, there is some credit coming to him. He did a very good job.
This afternoon I want to deal with a brief submitted by the Canadian Legion. I appreciate what the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Lapointe) has said concerning the intentions of the government. However, action has not been taken as yet, so I think it is just as well to review the situation. I shall not read the whole of the brief, as it is quite long, but this is the brief which went out from the dominion command in Ottawa. It reads in part as follows:
Implications and recommendations are one thing, but action is another.
We are told that the fall session of parliament will be short. War pensions and allowances must be made an issue. Basic pensions and allowances have lagged disastrously behind the rapid increase in the cost of living. Our knowledge of this situation and the issues at stake must serve as the spring-board for individual action on the part of every member of the legion interested in getting help to his disabled comrades this year. What action is to be taken? The answer is simple. These facts must be impressed upon your federal member of parliament by as many members of your branch as possible, and as often as it is necessary, to ensure that he will not return to Ottawa without a full understanding of the legion's position on this vital question.
If you can contact your member personally, so much the better. If you live a long distance from him, write him informing him of the pensioner's need. What is essential is an urgent reminder of that need, together with a strong appeal to support the legion's request for an over-all increase in war disability pensions and war veterans allowances to ensure action at the next session.

In the city of Medicine Hat we have a strong Legion composed of over 1,200 members. I am going to read a part of the letter that Legion branch sent to me. The president is Mr. Frank Cooney, and the secretary-manager is Mr. Lowell Haynes. It reads:
The time has come when real action must be taken in regard to the basic increases in war disability pensions and in war veterans allowances- words and promises will no longer suffice.
Then they say this:
We have been informed, very recently, that the cost of living in Canada has reached an all-time high and for the first time has surpassed that of the U.S.A.
War veterans allowance at present rates is wholly inadequate and is an outstanding example of governmental discrepancy, in that the man who is now a recipient of an old age pension in Canada receives more than the recipient of war veterans allowance. This same old age pensioner may have been in the lines against the recipient of the war veterans allowance. That is, the enemy soldier is treated better than the prematurely aged Canadian veteran. This is a most disgraceful situation to be permitted to exist in Canada.
Then I have a letter from another branch in my constituency, branch No. 10 in Strathmore, Alberta. The secretary-treasurer, Mr. W. Ian MacKenzie, has this to say:
We are not asking for an increase in the real value of the pension or allowance. We are merely asking that it be restored to its pre-war value. There is no question but that the pension today is worth in real values only about 65 per cent of what it was at the beginning of world war II. Remember also that pensions are an essential part of our war effort and must be made to conform to Canadian standards.
1 read those extracts, Mr. Speaker, so the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Lapointe) will realize that many others are thinking of an increase in their basic pensions today. One must also realize that we owe a debt to these pensioners. We owe them something which is their right. It is the duty of the government and also of every hon. member to see that veterans pensions are brought into line with the current high cost of living.
We know, Mr. Speaker, that the high cost of living is on everyone's mind today. What we are going to do about it, I do not know. It seems to me the Liberal government now in power must have experts in economics who can solve our problem. It is not up to me to say what they should do. The other day we were advised by one of the members of the government that they had too many lawyers in the cabinet. Perhaps that is right. If those lawyers and those experts in economics got us into the mess we are now in with respect to the high cost of living, surely they have brains enough to get us out of it.


Mr. Gibson:: They are waiting for the hon. member to tell them how.
The Address-Mr. Wylie


William Duncan McKay Wylie: I am glad to hear from the lumberman from the west coast. He is a man who is not worrying too much about the high cost of living.


John Lambert Gibson: Thank you.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: The price of lumber in my home city is out of all reason. The price has increased more than the price of anything else you can buy in any town. At the same time the quality has gone down.


John Lambert Gibson: Do you not produce it in your own province?


William Duncan McKay Wylie: All you have to do with some of the British Columbia lumber we get today is to stand it up on end, and the next morning you will And that the ground is covered with water. In addition it warps so badly that you cannot use it. I do not know just who produces this lumber. I do not know whether it is the hon. member for Comox-Alberni; but he has something to do with it.


John Lambert Gibson: You must pay freight on the water.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: We certainly pay freight on the water, and that is what we do not like. The price of lumber is too high, anyway. I have often heard the hon. member for Comox-Alberni talk about watered stock. The best watered stock we have in Canada today is the lumber we get from British Columbia.


John Lambert Gibson: We cannot get any of your gas, except here.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: If the hon. member wants to persist in interrupting, it is all right with me. But I may tell him that in Medicine Hat we have the driest gas of any at any place in Canada.


John Lambert Gibson: It sounds like it.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: It is the best gas in Canada.


John Lambert Gibson: Oh, oh.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: It is gas that does not freeze.


John Lambert Gibson: It is not illuminating, anyway.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: It is very illuminating. At one time the city of Medicine Hat was not only heated but also lighted by gas; and it was very illuminating. When the hon. member speaks about gas, he is talking to the wrong person when he talks to me, because Medicine Hat was illuminated by gas at one time. There is only one light that I know of still burning today.
The cost of living today 'has got out of all reason. Let these experts like the hon. member for Comox-Alberni, who is an independent member in this house at times, suggest how we are going to reduce the cost of living. I
594	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Wylie can tell him this. If he wants to reduce the cost of housing, he can. He is in the lumber business. One of our worst problems in Canada today is the housing problem. The reason the average man today cannot build a house is that he has to pay too much for his lumber.


John Lambert Gibson: How much lumber goes into a house? One thousand dollars.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: Plenty. I put 10,000 feet of lumber in my own house.


John Lambert Gibson: That is only $1,000.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Beaudoin):: Order.


John Lambert Gibson: What did your house cost?


William Duncan McKay Wylie: If the hon. member wants to make a speech, it is all right with me. If they want to reduce the cost of houses, apparently some of these lumbermen can do it.


John Lambert Gibson: How about oil?


William Duncan McKay Wylie: We talk about price maintenance. It has been mentioned in the speech from the throne. Price maintenance is something we have had for years. Price maintenance may stay with us. I am going to say this, however. If the manufacturers are forced into selling their goods for whatever they can get for them, may the Lord pity the small retailer.


Mr. Sinnott:: That is what the farmers do.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: They are going to be forced out of business. As we know, many proprietors of small stores today are operating on a shoestring.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Hear, hear.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: I am glad the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher) has said "hear, hear", because he has only three stores.


An hon. Member:: Four.


Mr. Fleming:: Four shoestrings.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: Apparently the hon. member has four stores. However, may I say this-


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: Rawhide.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: -that anyone who is operating a small business today, especially drygoods and ladies' ready-to-wear-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You had better stick to hardware.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: I know what is going to happen. The chain stores and the large department stores can reduce their prices on those articles. How long are they going to continue to do that?-that is the question. Are they going to reduce prices just long enough to put the small fellows out of business, and then put


their prices up again? That is something we must consider seriously before the bill, or whatever it is-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: -is passed.


Mr. Murphy:: "The Thing".


William Duncan McKay Wylie: This may be fun for many members, but it is not funny to me. It is very serious, because we are getting into a serious situation. If hon. members wish to laugh, and if the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Gibson) wishes to interrupt, then let them do so. But it is time they started to think about something. We hear talk about the high cost of living, and we wonder how so many people are getting along today on their meagre incomes. I am glad to see the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) in his seat, because I am going to read-


Mr. Fraser:: He is in somebody else's seat.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: In somebody else's seat-well, it is his privilege to sit there.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He should get into someone else's shoes.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: If you would keep quiet I would get along.
I have often discussed this matter with citizens in Medicine Hat. In this connection I should like to read from a letter I received from a man who has been in business for years and who bought bonds during the last war. Due to his age he has had to sell his business, and he is trying now to get along. In order to do that, however, he has found it necessary to sell some of his bonds. This is what he writes:
During the war I was one of a team from the Rotary club who sold bonds. At a school of instruction held in the city hall the question was asked: "Will these bonds have to be sold at a loss if sold before maturity, as were those of the first great war?" and the answer given us at the time was, "These bonds will be face value any time sold by presenting at your bank."
In order to get along he finds it necessary to sell one or two bonds each year. In a preceding paragraph in the letter he states:
1954 and 1957 were selling at a loss of $10 per $1,000, 1960 at a loss of $12.50 per $1,000, and 1966 at a loss of $22.37 per $1,000.
That is what has happened to the bonds sold during the last war, despite the fact that purchasers were told the bonds would be accepted at their face value. I believe I am right when I say that the present issue of bonds may be redeemed at their face value, but we see that the bonds sold during the last war were not. This has worked a hardship on many who bought bonds and who are now forced to sell them. This is something to which the Minister of Finance should give consideration.

This was mentioned by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) when he spoke in this debate. At that time some hon. members seemed to doubt what was said, but I can say it is true. That is the penalty people are paying for cashing in on their insurance policies, which were paying three per cent, and with that money buying bonds they are now forced to sell.
I am pleased to see the government has brought in a bill for old age security, so that everyone over the age of 70 years may receive a pension. I would say, however, that anyone who has not some additional income could not get along on this $40 a month. If they get only this $40, who is going to help them out? Is the dominion government going to do it? In Alberta, which pays one of the highest-I almost said the highest-old age pensions in Canada, the recipients will be badly disappointed if they receive only this $40. At the present time they receive $40 per month in one cheque and a supplementary payment of $10 in another. Not only that, but they have free medical, dental, optical and hospital care.
What is going to happen? Are the old people who come under the provisions of the new legislation going to receive these benefits, or will they receive only the $40 a month. It seems to me the federal government is trying to put the provinces in a position where they will have to use the means test, whether they like it or not. That is exactly what is going to happen. No province can pay $40 a month, or $10 a month plus all the other benefits, to all its citizens over 70 years of age. The dominion government collects the money for the pension of $40 a month; where will the provinces derive their income with which to make additional payments?


An hon. Member:: Oil.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: I am glad the hon. member mentioned that. Today in Alberta we are fortunate in that we have oil. But that oil was there prior to 1921, when the Liberals were in office. It was there before the Liberals were kicked out of office. That oil was there, and the Liberals could have used it so they would not have had to borrow money with which to build highways, for which we are still paying. So when you mention oil-yes, we have oil, and it is a Social Credit government that has developed the oil fields of Alberta. The Social Credit government of Alberta will develop the natural resources of that province so we will still be paying more than any other province to our senior citizens.
I should like to say one word about the price of wheat. I listened to the hon. member
The Address-Mr. Wylie for Moose Mountain (Mr. Smith) when he was speaking the other night. While we did have a good crop in southern Alberta this year, it was the' first crop in about twenty years that could be described as good. But the farmers in many parts of that section of the country have not been able to get off their crops, and a lot of grain is still in the stook or swath or even standing in the field. Speaking the other night, the hon. member for Moose Mountain had this to say, as reported at page 228 of Hansard of October 19:
Are we going to ask for a higher price for wheat? I am not in favour of doing that, Mr. Speaker, because if we did we would be joining the labour force in asking for higher wages, and it would be like a dog chasing its tail; we would be getting no place. But we are interested in keeping the tools that we need to produce the wheat in line.
That is what we want. What has happened to the cost of the tools used to produce wheat? What does a self-propelled combine cost today? This type of combine, which most people want to use, costs about $5,500.


An hon. Member:: What about a Cadillac, too?


William Duncan McKay Wylie: I suppose the hon. member would still use a scythe. We are not going back to those days. If a farmer wants a self-propelled combine there is no reason why he should not have it, because all the implement manufacturers in Canada produce this type of combine. If I cannot get help and want a self-propelled combine, I am certainly going to have one. A few years ago a combine, I admit not self-propelled, could be purchased for $2,500. As the hon. member for Moose Mountain has said, the price of that implement has doubled. Has the price of wheat doubled? Has the value of the dollar doubled?
During the war the farmers of this country subsidized the consumers, and they are still doing it. Apparently they will have to continue to do so until something is done about the Liberals. That is the situation today. The farmers are not at all satisfied with the price they are getting for their wheat, and why should they be? The farmers in Medicine Hat get about $1.18 per bushel for No. 1 and about $1.12 per bushel for No. 3 or No. 4. Some payments are made later on, and when they are someone always says the Liberal government is being so good in paying the 20 cents per bushel or whatever it may be. That is not the government's money; that is the farmer's money, and it is simply being given to the rightful owner. The government has held it back, has paid all these high salaries and everything else. Unless we have a prosperous agriculture in this country we are going to be in a bad way. Let us keep

The Address-Mr. A. W. Stuart agriculture, and this includes the growing of apples, at a fair level so we in this country may enjoy the fruits of our labour.


Mr. A. W. Stuart (Charlotte):: Mr. Speaker, first of all I should like to congratulate the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and seconder (Mr. Simmons) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I think we all appreciated their contributions. Belonging to this group who sit in the rump I can assure you that it did me good to have these hon. members chosen for this particular job, as they are both members of our group.
There are one or two matters I should like to bring to the attention of the government. First I want to congratulate the hon. member for Saint John-Albert (Mr. Riley) upon the presentation he made in connection with the Passamaquoddy tidal power project. The Canadian part of that projeot is entirely within my riding, and I certainly appreciate having a fellow citizen give such a detailed explanation. I believe many of those who live in the county of Charlotte also appreciate the effort of the hon. member. I should like to go on record as being greatly interested in this project, which has been tossed around now for some twenty-five years. It is of vital interest, not only to the county I represent but to that particular section of New Brunswick and perhaps to the whole province. In fact I believe there will be beneficial results accruing to all the maritime provinces. I should like to add a few words to what has been said by the hon. member in order that the house may understand more fully just what this project really is.
As I have said, I am quite familiar with that particular section. I have lived there all my life. I cruised the waters of every cove and inlet when I was engaged in the fishing industry for a period of twenty-three years. I feel that I can speak with some authority, and I can assure you that this project is no idle dream. In the opinion of those who are interested it is really feasible. It is felt that in the completion of this project will be found the salvation of the southern part of New Brunswick and of a large section of the maritime provinces.
I concur in what was said by the hon. member for Saint John-Albert about the lack of interest shown by the federal and other governments in Canada. For the information of hon. members I shall endeavour to point out some of the advantages of the 'Quoddy project. I do not believe the same set of circumstances can be found anywhere else on the North American continent. To the best of my knowledge and belief every hydro power project on this continent is dependent upon weather conditions for the production

of power to move the wheels of industry. In other words, droughts and floods create considerable fluctuations in the amount of power developed. This is not the case with the Passamaquoddy project. The source of power here is as reliable as the sun itself. Floods or droughts would not interfere with the productive power to the extent of one kilowatt hour in fifty years. May I say to those who have not seen just what we have there that it is a most unique proposition. Its possibilities are appreciated by many who know the history of 'Quoddy as I know it. There is little doubt in my mind that if this source of power were available in the central provinces there would have been no hesitation so far as its development is concerned. They are searching for more power in the central provinces today to add to what they already have, but in this particular section we are desperately short of power. It is needed greatly. The cost of the little power we have today makes it impossible for the people living there to enjoy the electrical appliances in their homes that they would like to enjoy. The cost of power is too great to use it for any other purposes than those that are absolutely necessary.
Another factor entering into this proposition which in my opinion would be of paramount importance is the fact that if this development were completed not a single acre of land in that area would be flooded. I am doubtful if you can find the same set of circumstances anywhere else in the world where a power dam has ever been built. The power in this case would be developed exclusively from the rise and fall of the tide. There would be no damage to property. No towns would have to be moved. No cemeteries would have to be moved, and no valuable farm land would be flooded. These problems do not enter into the situation at all. It is purely a matter of using the rise and fall of the tide for developing electrical energy. The only damage which would arise inside the enclosure where the dam would be built would be to the fishing industry. As I have stated, I was engaged in the Ashing industry for twenty-three years, and no one would have any more interest in the damage that might be created to that industry than myself. I believe, however, that the records of our Department of Fisheries in Ottawa indicate that this damage could be taken care of with very little difficulty. I am sure from my experience with the Canadian and American members of the international joint commission that neither the government of the United States nor the government of Canada would for one minute wish to deny the fishermen anything that

rightfully belonged to them. It is estimated that the damage caused by this project would be less than 10 per cent. I am informed that in the construction of Boulder dam, for instance, over 40 per cent of the cost was to pay for damages, which will give some idea of the difference between this project and some of the big power projects that have been completed on this continent. It is estimated that the 'Quoddy tidal project would have a capacity of 3 billion kilowatt hours per year, or about 1 million horsepower. Perhaps you can realize what 1 million horsepower would mean to a section of the country that is hungry for power. There is no question about the need. There is no question in my mind about the benefits that might be obtained from the completion of the development. In that section of Canada a million horsepower is badly needed.
To sum up, we would have an enormous block of power and a deep water harbour outside the dams,-I am doubtful if a better one could be found anywhere in Canada,- as a result of which we would benefit from cheap water transportation. Ships of any size could use the harbour that would be in the immediate vicinity of where the dams would be built. My final question to those in authority is: Why is so little enthusiasm shown with regard to Quoddy while apparently every effort is being made to deepen the St. Lawrence waterway system and at the same time develop a greater quantity of power in this part of the country? I have an article I should like to put on the record, taken from the issue of Newsweek of October 1, 1951. The heading is "Weather Hampering Defence; Aluminum Plants May Move." The article reads:
The nation's defence program, already plagued by materials shortages, strikes and high costs, was running into still another obstacle-the vagaries of an unruly nature. It was largely a case of too little or too much rain. In July record floods hit the midwest, causing $1 billion worth of damage, much of it to facilities engaged in important defence work. Meanwhile, the serious results of the Pacific northwest's hottest, dryest summer in twenty-five years appeared.
Late last week defence mobilizer Charles E. Wilson dramatically underscored the situation. He telegraphed the "big three" of the aluminum industry-Reynolds Metals Company, Kaiser Aluminum Company, and Aluminum Company of America -asking them to prepare plans for moving their plants from the Pacific northwest. The reason: a power shortage threatening to cut the use of electricity in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana.
Then I should like to read another paragraph reading:
Aluminum officials said there were apparently only two sites to which their operations could be moved quickly-idle second world war plants at Burlington. N.J., and Maspeth, N.Y. But, despite the presence of physical facilities which could be reactivated, they weren't at all sure power supplies
The Address-Mr. A. W. Stuart
would be adequate. The cost of moving the plants, furthermore, would undoubtedly be high. But one company executive pointed out that the solution was not as radical as it sounded since, barring construction of vast new hydroelectric plants, power would always be short in the northwest.
Then I should like to refer to the final statement which reads:
However, administrator James F. Fairman of the defence electric power administration on Monday announced that his body had never been consulted about the move; furthermore, he said, "We'd like to know where they plan to move . . . There is no available power supply anywhere in the United States.
I can assure Mr. Charles E. Wilson that there is a supply of power available in the 'Quoddy area. The people down there, who are greatly interested and who are firmly convinced it will be of enormous benefit to our section of the country, are patiently waiting for action to be taken, and some day we hope to see the completion of the project.
There is one other subject on which I wish to speak briefly. Some of my friends in the House of Commons have suggested to me that legislation to deal with price fixing is not necessary in the Dominion of Canada. They have a perfect right to their opinions, and I should like to express some of my views. A great portion of this debate has been taken up with a discussion of the high cost of living, something that today seems to dominate every piece of legislation that is brought into the house. It all turns to the one subject of inflation. Members from all parts of Canada and representing all parties in the house have expressed their views.
The C.C.F. members, as we all realize, believe that we should have direct controls. The Social Credit members have ideas of their own as to how the situation might be taken care of, and I believe my Conservative friends are between two fires. They discuss controls, but just how far those controls should go I have not been able to determine from what they have said. In my opinion there is a Liberal way, as there always has been, to approach this situation. In my own humble way and in a few minutes I should like to put on record methods that I believe would be of great benefit in fighting inflation.
I have stated that in my opinion the way to fight inflation is the Liberal way. By that I mean that the first approach should be to throw down the gates so far as customs barriers and tariffs are concerned. That is not an idea that was born last night. It is one that was bom before I was born. It is one I have believed in for as long as I can remember. It is something that my father believed in. Another factor that might convince me more than some other members is the particular section of the country from

The Address-Mr. A. W. Stuart which I come. I have lived all my lifetime on the international border where I have been able to see the benefits we derive from the markets we enjoy in the United States of America. And when I see this great difference between prices on the two sides of the border I am convinced immediately that one of the greatest things we have today with which to fight inflation with is our tariff regulations. What we in the maritime provinces need-and this applies as well to other sections of Canada-is the advantage of those things that they produce in the United States much cheaper than we have ever been able to produce them in Canada.
I will just take one minute to say here that two-thirds of what we produce down there is sold in the United States, and it goes into the United States duty free. If tomorrow there was a prohibitive tariff put on the things we produce-and it is mostly raw materials-the maritime provinces would get the greatest shock they have had since confederation, and one which I believe it would take them many years to overcome. The only markets we enjoy today are those that have been provided by our United States friends. Perhaps that is why I have been accused of leaning towards the United States. I can only say that they have been good to us down there. When we ship what we have to offer to the United States-and it means millions of dollars-we bring back United States dollars, and then we are obliged to use those United States dollars to pay double the price in central Canada for commodities that we would like to have in our homes, and that we could buy right on our doorstep for one-half what they charge here. Believe it or not, it is a hard one for me to explain to my people. They know that all my lifetime I have been advocating freer trade, and I will continue to do so as long as I live. I believe that if we could overcome the tariff wall, it is one of the things that would help us in this battle against inflation.
Comparisons have been made during this debate with commodities such as butter, eggs, meat, bread and several other primary products. We were given the prices we were obliged to pay in Canada, and they have been compared with those in the United States. I believe we will all agree there is a very small difference between the prices paid for these articles in the two countries. The comparison that was made by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) with regard to the two capitals I think would be a fair comparison between any two cities in the United States and Canada. I believe the comparison was fair, but at the same time the very articles that are responsible for the high
TMr. Stuart (Charlotte).)


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: Down 6 cents today.


Andrew Wesley Stuart: We can take Rinso, Duz, or any other you might wish to name. Take any brand you wish to choose; take the price in the United States and the price in Canada, and you will find a difference of 35 to 50 per cent. There are some soaps that I can buy in the city of Calais at two for a quarter which cost 25 cents a cake in Canada. If the soap manufacturers can explain that one away, again I have no argument left. These are the things that are responsible for the high cost of living in this country today. When people tell me that the increase in the cost of living in the United States has not been as rapid as it has been in Canada, may I say that to anyone living on the border the reason is quite plain. There is no justification for a difference of from 30 per cent to 50 per cent, and in some cases 100 per cent, as I will show the house in a minute. I would suggest that the articles I have pointed out are glaring examples of monopolies. We pay for all the radio advertising that goes on. It is all included in the price of the goods; I realize that. But they do not do any more advertising in Canada than is done in the United States. All I ask them to do is to explain this great difference in prices.
I want to mention one other thing just briefly because I have not the facts and figures before me. I do it for the benefit of the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin). I am sorry he is not in his seat. I wish he would get a record of the price that is being paid today by Canadians for insulin, and then get the price that is being paid for insulin in the United States. If hon. members do that they will get one of the greatest shocks they ever had in their lifetime. Insulin is a drug that is used today by thousands of Canadians. Diabetics all over the country must have insulin in order to live. When you get a difference of from 50 per cent to 100 per cent in the cost of insulin as between the United States and Canada you are convinced that something is wrong somewhere. I cannot vouch for it, but I have been told that the drug firms that produce insulin in Canada are subsidized by this government, though that is not firsthand information. A friend of mine in the town where I
The Address-Mr. A. W. Stuart live informed me that he could buy insulin in Calais, Maine, for about 60 per cent of what he could buy it in St. Andrews, New Brunswick. Is that right? Should that go on? This is something needed by a small portion of our population, but many of them cannot afford the prices being charged in Canada at the present time.
I shall get back to my old theme song, and that is electrical appliances. I love to talk about them. It is only a few years ago that the General Electric company purchased a very beautiful plant in Hamilton. My good friend the hon. member for Hamilton East (Mr. Ross) and some of the other boys around there were told the company was going to give us electrical appliances for the same prices that were charged in the United States. They were going to roll off the assembly line in just a few months. To the best of my knowledge that assembly is not a dream; it is there. But I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that the commodities that roll off that assembly line have quite different price tags on them than in the United States. One could take radios, vacuum cleaners, toasters, washing machines, refrigerators and oil burners, and there are dozens of others I could name if I wished. In nine cases out of ten they are manufactured in Canada by the same manufacturer who produces them in the United States. But when you compare the prices you find there is something wrong somewhere. I have made this statement before, and I wish to put it on the record again.
I live on the bank of the St. Croix river, and you can throw a stone across to the other side. On one side of that border an electric refrigerator sells for $225. If you walk across the little bridge to the other side it sells for $460. It is made by the same company. If there is any justification for that I should like to have some official of the General Electric or these other companies who manufacture electrical appliances appear before a committee of this house and explain to the members why there is that great differential. I cannot understand it. It is a bone of contention for every member who represents a constituency bordering upon the United States.
One other thing I want to mention is farm machinery. Again this is not information which I have obtained myself, but it has been given to me by friends in this house. A few years ago the duty on farm machinery from the United States was cut by the government. At that time there was a great disturbance amongst the manufacturers in Canada. I atn told that today all these different machines which are so necessary for modern farming

The Address-Mr. A. W. Stuart can be purchased for the same price in Canada as in the United States. Who would be responsible for that change?
I was a young man in 1927 when the former prime minister, Mr. Mackenzie King, stood up in this house and said he was going to cut the duty on automobiles by 25 per cent. Immediately afterwards the greatest number of delegates arrived on parliament hill that have ever been here or ever will be here. If the duty on automobiles was cut the manufacturers in Canada would be obliged to close their doors. I remember reading that, because it was headlined in every newspaper you picked up. The prime minister stood by his guns and the duty was cut. If one goes over the record as shown in the Automobile Guide one finds that more automobiles were sold in Canada in 1929 than were ever sold before, and it was 1947 before that figure was ever passed. This would seem to indicate that articles can be manufactured in Canada at nearly the same cost as in the United States whenever the manufacturers are forced to do so. So long as they have the tariff protection their costs will be based on the cost in the United States, plus the duty, plus sales tax, plus defence tax, and 2 per cent on top of that. That is just enough to make sure that people will not go through all the red tape necessary to buy in the United States and bring the article into Canada. Every Canadian citizen would be justified in so doing. I do not believe in supporting monopolies, particularly within our own country.
The first thing many might say is that if the gates were thrown open it would mean a lot of unemployment in the sections where manufacturing takes place. Did you ever stop to realize that many of those engaged in manufacturing came from the maritimes and the west? I believe that conditions would so improve if this action were taken that a great percentage of those people would want to go back, because to a maritimer only the maritimes is home. If a person could make some sort of living there you would never tempt him to come to central Canada. I believe the answer to our problem is to throw open the gates and give the people of this country an opportunity to buy the things they would like to buy for their homes at prices that are not unreasonable.
A few days ago when the member for Calgary East (Mr. Harkness) spoke in this debate he mentioned a fact that we do not hear from his group very often. He was bitterly critical of the freight charges which the citizens of western Canada have to pay on the automobiles they buy from Ontario. I agree with the statement he made. I have
[Mr. Stuart (Charlotte).)
a small clipping from a Winnipeg paper which I shall not put on record, but it bitterly criticizes the fact that the western people are forced to pay that freight. Something should be done about it. In my opinion the automobile industry is the greatest monopoly of them all. Each and every one of us recognizes that. We may wink at it, but it is a statement of fact. If I purchase a car in New Brunswick I pay the freight on it from Ontario to New Brunswick. If my friend the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Gibson) purchases a car in British Columbia, he pays over $300 freight on it. I feel it would not be any great task for anyone to take a pencil and ascertain the number of units which are manufactured in Canada each year-they are all on record in the Automobile Guide-and I think it would be found that by increasing the cost of automobiles to the residents of Ontario and Quebec by $50, an automobile could be sold to the member for Comox-Alberni for the same price as it was sold in Ontario. Two-thirds of the automobiles that are produced are sold in Ontario and Quebec.
I believe that is one of the most glaring examples of "we have it; take it or leave it", the action of a monopoly. We find that no branch of the automobile industry has been established anywhere outside Ontario. We are all obliged to pay what they demand. I think the time has come when the members of the house should get together and take action. I believe the members from Ontario would be as fair as anyone else. I do not think for one minute that they believe a setup of this kind should be tolerated. It is wrong.
There is one other question on which I want to touch briefly. There will be a discussion concerning freight rates. The people of this country who have the best means at their disposal for adjusting freight rates are the manufacturers themselves. I want to put on record the fact that some of the goods produced in the maritimes are sold in other parts of Canada for the same price as they are sold in the maritime provinces. A few examples would be Moir's chocolates, Gan-ong's, Stanfield's products, and the Hartt shoe company. Their products are sold in every part of Canada for the same price. But if Ganong Brothers want a truck to use in their business they have to pay the freight on that truck from Ontario to Charlotte county. In my opinion a lot could be done in this regard, and it would make us much happier than we are at the present time.
Again I should like to emphasize the fact that, as I live in a constituency that borders on the United States, so many of these things

The Address-Mr. A. W. Stuart
are brought to my attention every day that seem extremely convincing that monopolies are as thick as they can be all over this country. Why should I stand up in my place and oppose any legislation this government might devise which would take care of that situation?
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I want to make one prediction which will never come true, perhaps, because the suggestions I have made will not get very far. Nevertheless I want to make one prediction. Throw open the gates in this country for three months and the cost of living will drop by many points. We all know that. Again I want to say that this is the Liberal approach to the problem. I only hope that the men here who have listened to my remarks today will just add a little bit to what I have said and see if something
connot be done to put in their place these monopolistic organizations that we have in Canada.
On motion of Mr. Murphy the debate was adjourned.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Fournier (Hull):: Tomorrow we will take up second reading of Bill No. 13, to provide for old age security; then resolution No. 8 on today's order paper in the name of the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson). If we have time left we shall take up resolutions Nos. 4 and 5 on today's order paper.
At 6.30 p.m. the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to the order of the house passed on October 26, 1951.
isd/'h/i m/m A 1 flRRARIL

Thursday, November 1, 1951